Homer Simpson has been named man of the decade by a British magazine, according to this report. His claim to fame: Philosopher.
Editor Morgan Rees said: “These are people of real substance and solid achievement rather than temporary fame.
“The people on our list have used their talents to change the world around them, rather than just to draw attention to themselves”.
Personally, I think Matt Groening has a lot to answer for *grin*. It’s fascinating to see the extent to which the Simpsons have infiltrated the culture and not-so-subtly influenced the (our?) language. Once upon a time I would have been completely disgusted by this but actually I have come to appreciate some of the very clever writing, especially when I read ‘deconstructing the Simpsons’ pages like this one.
I have been invited to give a keynote address for the 2006 ASFLA conference, which has the theme:
Multimodal Texts and Multiliteracies: Semiotic Theory and Practical Pedagogy.
We had to send off details and an abstract already, and here is mine:
Title: Role-playing in Rivendell: Young people’s multimodal digital storying
Presenter: Angela Thomas
Abstract:
In this paper I explore the multimodal virtual world of the palace. In particular I focus on the role-playing and storytelling practices in which a range of young people are involved. Textual data consists of screen videos of the role-playing, which utilises text, image and sound. I also draw from ethnographic-based interviews conducted with young people (aged 13-18) to contextualise the textual data. Textual data is analysed using a functional grammar of language (Halliday 1995; Martin 2004; Humphrey and Droga, 2004) and other semiotic modes such as image and sound (Kress and van Leeuwen, 1996; van Leeuwen, 1999), and considered in light of new digital literacy studies (Lankshear and Knobel, 2005; Barton and Hamilton, 2000). Additionally, the data is linked to the new web-based literacy practices symbolised by “Web 2.0” (Cuene, 2005), and related to the principles of participation, communication, world-building, and global citizenship (Davis, 2005). Implications these practices have for education will also be addressed.
It looks like a fabulous conference with plenary speakers such as Theo van Leeuwen, Jim Martin, Mary Macken-Horarik, John Stephens and others. I am going to tell my friends to come along and have a little holiday in Armidale while they’re here because it is so pretty here!!
Yesterday I blogged in a hurry because I had a busy day to attend to, so I was very lazy with my hyperlinks, and given the questions about what I was saying by Lalitha and David in my comments, I thought I should elaborate!
So, basically Mark Bernstein, whose blog is here, came to Australia and presented a paper at the Blogtalk DownUnder conference in May. The slides to his presentation (and lots of other fabulous presentations) are here, but if you search his blog you don’t have to go far to see his views> Essentially he says:
I’ve long argued that weblog comments are not worth the risk — that they inevitably devolve into damaging, acrimonious, and expensive flame wars. (Mark Bernstein)
and from here:
Comments don’t belong in weblogs.
The measured pace of weblog response, and the distance between rival weblogs, makes measured discourse possible. Comments let idiots deface your weblog, and that’s intolerable. Because you can’t tolerate it, you have to do something. And that means the idiots have to do something, too. (Mark Bernstein)
Now please don’t misunderstand me here, I respect Mark’s opinion and believe that in some cases this can be absolutely true. There are some occasions where I have deleted a rude comment here for example because I don’t want to engage in debate with somebody who is clearly being hostile. Also, I am not somebody famous like Mark, so the level of traffic and potential comments is very minimal in comparison.
Nevertheless, in general I love comments (the few comments that I get, that is), because most of the time they are with people who want to engage with me or my ideas. I have just finished writing a paper where I discuss blogging as part of the new wave of cyberculture and here’s an excerpt:
Blogging
Weblogs, or blogs, have become a new web phenomenon over the past few years. Kelly (2005) writes that the incredible rise of participant media such as blogs has shocked media experts, and envisions that in the near future, ‘everyone alive will (on average) write a song, author a book, make a video, craft a weblog, and code a program’ (Kelly, 2005, online). The impact of blogging in particular has been profound across the world, with its power to showcase the everyday experiences of people from all circumstances and contexts. One of the most surprising consequence of writing my own blog, i-Anya (Thomas, 2004-current) has been the new International network of colleagues I have made, and the stimulating level of intellectual debate, scholarship, discussion and friendships that have developed. Many academics are now blogging, and are experiencing the same exciting stimulation. Farrell, a writer for the US Chronicle of Education, argues that:
…the majority [of academics who blog], see blogging as an extension of their academic personas. Their blogs allow them not only to express personal views but also to debate ideas, swap views about their disciplines, and connect to a wider public. For these academics, blogging isn’t a hobby; it’s an integral part of their scholarly identity. They may very well be the wave of the future… academic blogs also provide a carnival of ideas, a lively and exciting interchange of argument and debate that makes many scholarly conversations seem drab and desiccated in comparison. Over the next 10 years, blogs and bloglike forms of exchange are likely to transform how we think of ourselves as scholars. While blogging won’t replace academic publishing, it builds a space for serious conversation around and between the more considered articles and monographs that we write.
(Farrell, 2005, “The Blogosphere as a Carnival of Ideas”)
The willingness of others to share their intellectual ideas, to engage in healthy debate, and to link academic works in progress has given me access to a type of scholarship I don’t experience regularly in the frantic daily grind of academic life. Through my blog and engagement in my blogging affinity spaces, I have been afforded the opportunity to build, refine and sharpen my intellectual ideas. By simply having a web presence I have found other like-minded colleagues who enter into dialogue with me about my work on a regular basis. This new type of networking has been and continues to be, for me, an invaluable force in shaping my thinking and my career choices. For me, Web 2.0 is about far more than creating content together with others, it’s also about creating new spaces for all forms of social, emotional and intellectual engagement with others. If academic blogging is ‘the wave of the future’, as Farrell suggests, then research should be conducted to explore the conditions under which this works most effectively.
(from: Thomas, A. (forthcoming). Community, Culture and Citizenship in Cyberspace. In: Lankshear, C., Knobel, M., Leu, D. and Cairo, J. (Eds.), The Handbook of New Literacies Research. Erlbaum.)
and commenting plays a role in all that. I also get emails from people who don’t like to comment, and thatis part of the engagement I am speaking of too. So basically I think Mark Bernstein has an important point about academic reputation in the event of a full scale flame war erupting (which I know I wouldn’t cope with at all!) but I think since I can regulate the comments then the risk of that happening is minimal, particularly given my low status in the food chain *grin*.
I would be interested in what others have to say about this.
Edited later to add in: this link to DrJoolz’s post about comments.
My flickr eyes seem to be focussing in on roses lately… yesterday I experimented with getting shots that would be worthy of the rose interiors flickr group. So here are two originals and then close-ups of their respective interiors. Enjoy!
