I'm Quite Happy with My "Donkey," Thank You Very Much

I really dislike watching TV. With the exception of watching Dr. Who, I watch for informational purposes and not for entertainment. I try to DVR most programs, but that seems like overkill for the news, so I have to sit through the commercials. Call it an occupational hazard if you like, but I can't help but to analyze the annoying commercials that the vast majority of us passively sit through and absorb. This commercial is in my current “Top 5 Cannot Stand" list: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1xPZEsdQ94

Are you ready for my rant?

First, I am offended at the unabashed stereotyping by the MetroPCS company as demonstrated by using two men portraying Indian (South Asian) call center techs. Stereotyping can be defined as the "unthinking tendency to reduce individuals and cultures into one-dimensional, often slanderous, visual cliches." (Ewan & Ewan). We, as a general population, are already too unthinking for our own good--commercials themselves reinforce this national tendency towards having the biggest and the best. The inclusion of Ranjit and Chad with their dark make-up and overly accented English are the one-dimensional cliche. While it is true that India has become one of the most robust technological economies in the world, it would be wrong to assume that this is the only area in which this burgeoning country demonstrates remarkable growth.

In his blog post titled "Is MetroPCS's New Commercial Racist? Many Say "Ranjit and Chad" Are Indian Tech-Help Stereotypes," Jim Edwards, an ad specialist writes, "you could argue that the ad is funny because it’s actually an ironic satire about Indian stereotypes, and is thus critiquing the racism within itself. But for viewers without sociology degrees, it looks a lot more like 'look at the funny Indians!'" His point about viewers without sociology degrees, or viewers without any real critical thinking skills, simply reinforces the "unthinking" characteristic of stereotyping. From my perspective as an educator in higher learning, we lack the skills needed to think seriously about the objectionable garbage that advertising agencies are constantly feeding us.

And what does all this have to do with mobile phones, anyways?

Believe it or not, my irritation runs much deeper than this. We live in a society that has taken consumerism to the extreme. Consider the plea by former President Bush to stimulate the war economy by spending. That is in direct contrast to the war efforts in the 1940's that called on Americans to restrict savings, to save money and resources, to be frugal. Consumer spending and debt have increased not just steadily, but astronomically while our savings are virtually nonexistent, according to The Daily Reckoning. MetroPCS is encouraging us to participate in this consumerist frenzy: old donkeys, or widgets, can't possibly be any good. Get a new one. What is wrong with my old widget if it meets my needs perfectly well? What if I really like my old widget's personality or features? What if I don't NEED a new widget? It's a feedback cycle, though. Noted linguist and cultural critic Noam Chomsky believes that the Wall Street focus on greed and consumerism actually is not random, but a calculated means to distract the general population. When the voting public is distracted by working so hard to buy things, it hardly has the time to keep up with politics and the very mechanics of our American way of life. This is how policies are adopted and put into place that continually promote increased consumer spending. It's about control.

But I'm not done yet. This focus on always having the newest and "coolest" brings me to my next point. Not only do we live in an over the top consumerist society, we live in one that is increasingly embracing what I have heard called "the culture of cheating." This is evidenced by the recent (and some not so recent) rash of news stories about highly respected and/or famous individuals caught having extra-marital affairs. While the person caught cheating can make public apologies, television viewers are ripe for the gossip and lurid details. It's reality TV gone to the extreme. As unthinking viewers, we seem to have reached the point where fiction and dramatized events no longer sate our appetites; we need to see real people display their real life drama, abuse, and heartache. Then, persons hired to do "damage control" are paid exorbitant fees to ensure that this politician, athlete, or celebrity can continue his or her career with as few career hindering effects as possible. In many cases, the general public's short term memory is sufficient: Kobe Bryant is a good example of this phenomenon. The real reality is not about drama or the affair at all, however, but our growing tolerance of disrespect. That's what infidelity boils down to: a lack of respect for another person so profound that s/he is no longer deserving of something as fundamental as honesty.

This same MetroPCS commercial actually combines our consumerist/cheating culture perfectly, and in a sinister way. If we are unhappy with our current partner, if s/he is no longer cool and exciting or showing the effects of age, or simply becoming too familiar, it is not only acceptable but encouraged to find a new one--even if it's just for kicks or a frivolous romantic interlude. In other words, get a new donkey! One need not even be apologetic about it. It's simply matter of fact.

Taking my argument one final step further, this commercial is ultimately degrading to women. Why a donkey and not a phone? To begin, donkeys (commonly known as asses) are beasts of burden. They are associated in biblical literature as symbolic of meekness and humility, in classical mythology of lust and stupidity, and in Indian myth as sinister (Tressider 54). Women have historically been associated with each of these ideas. The Bible was among the first historic texts that promoted patriarchal culture and female subservience, as noted by the elimination of Lillith from the Creation accounts and her subsequent association with evil. Women have been, and in some cultures still are, considered embodiments of lust and reviled for their generative powers and the mysteries of menstruation. On top of that, women have, until recent times, been denied education and basic human rights as a result of their gender. Today, women are still fighting for equal rights not just in third world countries but right here in The United States.

I realize that perhaps I am making a bigger deal out of an eighteen second commercial than is necessary, and some would even point out that the fact that I have chosen to write about it makes it effective on some level. I concede that this is probably true. But my point is less about the medium and more about the message. We need to think about many things. What are we passively allowing to invade our homes and our minds? What is the real cost? Even if I don't run out and buy a new widget, what are the underlying forces at work here? If I am not considering the ramifications of my television viewing habits then clearly I am not in control. And if I am not, then who is?

Works Cited

Bonner, Bill, and Addison Wiggin. “U.S. Consumer Spending.” The Daily Reckoning. Web. 5 Apr. 2010.

Chomsky, Noam. Interview. 10 Oct. 2008. Spiegel Online International. 5 Apr. 2010. Web.

Edwards, Jim. "Is MetroPCS's New Commercial Racist? Many Say "Ranjit and Chad" Are Indian Tech-Help Stereotypes" BNET. 2 Feb. 2010. Web. 5 April 2010.

Ewan, Stuart, and Elizabeth Ewan. Typecasting: On the Arts and Sciences of Human Inequality. New York: Seven Stories Press, 2008. Print.

Tressider, Jack. ed. The Complete Dictionary of Symbols. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 2005. Print.

The Great Blog Experiment

I had been wanting to begin blogging with my students for some time, but was reluctant to try something new. As far as I know none of my colleagues have their students blog, I don't know any other of my teaching peers who do it from other institutions, and, well, it's the fear of the unknown that often prevents us from moving forward with even the best ideas. So, last semester I finally mustered up the courage to set off on this new experiment.

I had to think out the process not just in terms of pedagogy, but pragmatically speaking as well. Pedagogically, blogging was to replace freewriting in my classes. I believe thoroughly in the principles of freewriting as introduced by Peter Elbow, which are essentially to create low-stakes writing opportunities designed to just get students writing without fear of it having to be "right." But in both my online and f2f classes I saw that it was increasingly turning into a rote process that lacked in creativity and ended up being just another hoop to jump through. I wanted writing to be meaningful to students. I wanted them to see the potential that they had, for them to believe in and trust their writing abilities as I did. Something had to change. I really wrestled with letting freewriting go because I still felt my students needed low stakes writing opportunities that it readily supplied. Epiphany! I could incorporate many of the freewriting principles into blogging.

Blogging is fundamentally a social activity with a potentially wide audience, whereas freewriting is primarily private, so I thought it would be a good idea for students to not only publish but to respond to one another's posts. This helps to create community in an otherwise anonymous online environment. The audience aspect, I figured, would push students to put more thought into their posts. When nobody reads a freewrite but me, it's easy to just let one's fingers type without thought in the head. No longer when there is somebody else tuning in!

Next came the practical process of how to carry this project out on a class wide level (several classes, actually). I created sample blogs, logged the process, and then had to figure out how to manage and assess each individual student's blog. This was, for me, the most daunting aspect of adding it to my courses. I figured it out, though, and have devised what I think is a pretty workable solution.

The end result? Well, it was greater than I had ever hoped for. First, the blogs from last semester were AMAZING! Just about every single post was meaningful and well composed, and my students were genuinely engaged with the material and with each other. The responses that they made to one another were encouraging and extended the conversation thoughtfully and in unexpected ways.

At the end of the semester, when I read their evaluations of the class, almost every single student said that blogging was the best part of the class. They strongly felt that it exponentially enhanced their learning experience. I was stunned! Success.

But I must tell you this: my greatest thrill was realizing that a student who had dropped my class continues to blog. This person found in blogging a medium, a voice, an outlet. It made that much of an impact. And that, is what teaching is really about.

The Power of Voice

I have just finished teaching a Women in Literature class for the first time this past semester. I had never taught the class before, and volunteered to teach it just 2 weeks prior to the term beginning. The course had been prepared by one of my colleagues who suddenly was unable to teach it.

When I read the syllabus, however, I began to wonder if perhaps I had made a huge mistake. I had only read one of the five assigned texts, and the one I had read was back in 1985. How was I supposed find time to read not only the books but the criticism that goes along with each so that I could present the literary analyses required? Panic!

On the first day of class I was uncharacteristically nervous, worried that this room full of expectant faces would somehow discover the impostor that I felt I was. My mouth went dry and I could barely lecture. I remained uncomfortable until about half way through the first novel because--and this is perhaps what I love best about teaching--we had the most incredibly enlightening discussions, and we all learned about each of the novels together. They were not only GETTING it, but they were ENJOYING it! And so, I found, was I.

One of the primary themes we based all of our novel discussions on was the idea of "voice," and how the main character in each novel finds her voice, her ability to stand and speak for herself, attains autonomy in a world dominated by men, and reveals her truth.

I am forever changed by this class. I have a much greater appreciation of those strong, brave women who paved the way for me to be independent, to have, as Virginia Woolf believes all women should have, a "room of my own." But more importantly, in these last six months, I found MY voice. I regained confidence in myself as a professor, as a woman, as part of an academic community. Although we read the lives of fictional characters, these women inspired me to live authentically and on my own terms.

Look out world--we are here and we have something to say!