The Ghosts in our Schools

This past summer I posted on problems of Hermeneutics within the notion of blogging itself. In the comments to the post, Professor Stanzler wrote that there is an element of faith in this type of communication. I could not agree more. Exactly how to define this faith is something that has bothered me for a long time. Every time that words come out of my mouth, they can be taken the wrong way. Every time that I write something on my blog, it can be interpreted in a manner far from what I intended. Communication is a fragile enterprise, but there is nothing more important.

Sharing meaning is a dangerous business. Unless you are a clairvoyant of some kind, you are unable to step directly into the mind of another. (And if you are a clairvoyant, stay away from me. There are moments when my inner life lacks dignity.) This leaves us only two real options: sharing time and touch with another, and the use of language. Giving someone your time and touch, two things that cannot be reproduced, is perhaps the only ways to truly convey a meaningful message to someone. (This is the essential conclusion behind the work of scholar John Durham Peters.) A hug means more than telling someone to feel better, holding someone's hand means more than any poem, a lifetime of fidelity means more than all of the words of love ever written. However, most people are very careful with whom they share their time and touch - so we arrive at option number two. The second way that we attempt to share meaning is through the use of language, but as Peters notes and most agree with, words are crude representations of inner life. Yet, so crude as they may be in representation, they play a more important role for us than many realize.

This importance is perhaps suggested to us in The Phenomenology of Spirit, a beautiful book by German philosopher GWF Hegel. To probably oversimplify, Hegel wrote that ‘there is no self without the other.’ While he goes on to argue the less convincing point that there is no real inside and one cannot know what they really think or feel without the presence of others, his point is an important one. How would you know that you exist without the recognition of others? You recognize me; I exist. I recognized you; you exist. Together we enable humanity.

This recognition is enabled primarily through the use of language. Thus, it seems to me that existence as we know it is built upon a very two interesting foundations. The more stable recognition, that of time and touch, is essentially what propels humanity into the future (given a specific interpretation of the two words together). The second, more fickle, foundation of existence is that of language. So why does this matter for a teacher?

Language is the tool of a teacher. I guess the point I’m trying to get at here is be careful to acknowledge all of your students – a smiley on an assignment, a word here, a small conversation there – sometimes such words do more than assess and acknowledge. Some kids can go through a school day without speaking a word. At times, I was one of those students in high school. Ghosts do walk through our schools. It is possible to not-exist for hours at a time. How does it feel when you write a blog and no one comments on it? It’s almost like the post doesn’t exist. Words, as frightening as they can be when you’re trying to share your inner world, can mean more than you think.

Whiskey with John and Jon

A few posts ago I let my nerdiness fly as I began a post talking about my top ten list of academics. Some list their favorite sports teams, some list their favorite foods, some list their favorite drinks, and some just might list their favorite academics. Well, just as whiskey on the rocks is an unmovable classic in the top drinks of all time, John Dewey holds a permanent position on my list of top academics.

Now, we’ve read some of Dewey’s work and thought on education. Fantastic thinker, isn’t he? Well, just as whisky on the rocks is a versatile drink enjoyable with friends at the bar or an agreeable evening enhancement as you enjoy a book by the fireplace, Dewey is a brilliant man whose work holds axiom-like positions in many fields of academia. Though Dewey was dazzling in his educational philosophy begging for a progressive cultivation of a thoughtful and skilled member of humanity, I believe this thought (shared by many) is but a shrub growing next to the redwood that is his work in the field of communications.

Dewey was one of the founding fathers in the field of communications. Setting up this field, he coined the term “public,” which is essentially used to describe a group of citizens all working for the same thing. Good, great, grand. You’re probably thinking, “Wow, Jon, smart man. It’s great how people become famous for pointing out the obvious.” But wait, this term is merely a tool. Dewey’s main work talks about how today’s dispersal of information is causing problems within these publics; publics being the idea upon which our very democracy is built upon. Today’s media is creating publics, across time and space, with interests that – in simple language – are a goddamn waste of time, energy, and thought. There are websites for every cause – from banning Barry Bonds from baseball, to building a giant wall on our southern borders. Dewey worries that when such publics form, people lose the interest in local community issues. For Dewey, politics should not be the business of communications, but rather each citizen should focus on the world around them to be an involved member of democracy.

We have entered an age where real action is being replaced by ritual participation through communications technology. For example, no longer do students mobilize to try to make a change - they believe that change can be reached by simply pushing a button and joining a "group" on facebook. Through their profile has a link to the "I think George Bush is an Idiot" page, this virtual world has little or no effect in the realm where our national debt has become unfathomable. Thanks to the world of mass communications, our democracy is now characterized by an ineffective large public, and smaller publics that are unable to interact and counteract the real problems of society. We have entered a paradox: our over-connectedness causes disconnect.

Now, anyone with a critical eye and knowledge of Dewey, will shake their head at my oversimplification and partial butchering of Dewey’s communication work. (There’s much more to it, and the above statements were merely premises in his main argument about the role of journalism is society.) However, what no one can argue against, or shake their head at, or call tomfoolery, is the following: Dewey would have been a huge advocate for education in media literacy!

Premise: Dewey’s Educational Theory asked for the full education of an individual with
skills and knowledge to be incorporated to their lives as citizens and human beings.
Premise: Dewey’s Communication Theory spoke of the problems the Mass Media brings
upon the public
Premise: Media Literacy is not a set of facts, but rather a tool of critical thinking to
decipher and take a critical view of media communications and how information is presented in today’s society.

Conclusion: John Dewey and Jon D’Angelo would sit together, drink whiskey on the
rocks, and congratulate each other on their advocacy for media literacy.