« June 2004 | Main | August 2004 »

Book Matters

I was very happy to discover that EMC, the publisher of my new textbooks, has a decent website with pdf files of the table of contents of each book. After browsing through the contents, I feel pretty good about this book. During my student teaching, I observed the teachers go through the book selection process, and everyone pretty much felt enthusiastic about this series compared to those of Holt and Prentice Hall. If you follow these links, you can click on the contents for each book to download the pdf file.

World Literature
Ninth Grade Literature

I like that the units develop around themes rather than regions because I'd love to highlight commonalities instead of just what sets us apart. Also, the themes aren't as infantile as I've seen in other books. Selections represent the ancient world and the modern. There's some Kafka for my friend Hoffman, Bessie Head for my dear Mary, Pablo Neruda and Derek Walcott for me and some Wordsworth and Pope to keep criticism at bay.

Now, if only the book would arrive.

Anyone have general comments on the quality of this book, or favorite selections from it?

In Response To The Man

Dave Shearon responded to my post about my upcoming classes, including what I said about preparing for world literature.

Bad news: she came out of college and ed school unprepared.
Good news: she knows it, and she's doing something about it.
Bad news: she's thinks teaching the works of white westerners is a bad thing.
Bad news: she apparently has no clue of the ramifications of this statement.
On balance: bad news.

I am rather prepared to teach most English classes if an undergraduate degree in English Literature and Creative Writing and a Masters degree in English and Teaching English from a competitive school and perfect scores on any standardized test you can think of, including my teacher certification test, count for anything. If they don't, I've still read and studied widely. I don't know how many undergraduate or graduate English students explictly study Peruvian folklore or ancient Malasian creation myths, but those works are in the high school textbook. So, I am missing those pieces, which I am more than pleased to fill in.

One handicap that one of my professors brought to my attention is that some of the texts I chose to include on a sample syllabus were written by hypenated Americans, not nationals of countries other than America. I will probably still want to include many of these authors, but I want to be aware of and sensitive to the distinction.

I also wondered why I only hear the same few authors names thrown about when discussing the teaching of world literature: Sanrda Cisneros, Chinua Achebe, Li Young Lee, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, etc. I love these authors but I still wonder what authors are out there I haven't been exposed to yet? For each choice to include, I also make the choice to exclude certain material. I want to make good decisions.

Further, some teachers of world literature choose to focus primarily on classical texts from around the world, sometimes reading religious/spiritual/philosophical texts. Other teachers stick with only modern voices. I would like to strike a balance, but there is so much material, I find my balance a touch tenuous.

I don't think that teaching white, male, westerners is a bad thing, I just think that there are three whole other years of that in high school, and world literature is the one class that explicitly addresses, oh, what the rest of the world has to say. And, like I said before, the world is a rather wide place, so I want to think very carefully about how I will frame my course and in what context I will present my text selections.

So, if I am bad news, so be it. I could make a lot more money in the corporate world and your children can go back to a teacher that can't pass a Praxis and doesn't know who Ralph Ellison is.

Bonafide Teacher Stuff

I have a schedule, hopefully the final version of one, for what I'm teaching very, very soon. I will teach two 9th grade classes, one of which is "inclusion," and one 11th grade World Lit class. Inclusion means there will be some special needs folks in the class and there will be a special needs teacher who does the class with me. I have absolutely no clue how that will work but I'm open to anything that includes another adult in the class for part of the day. My mentor teacher left me alone in the class much of the time when I was student teaching and she took several days off, but still, I'm a touch nervous about total responsibility.

I am using my mini-vacation before school to read up on "world" literature. My new textbooks won't arrive until about 5 weeks after school starts and I'm not familiar with much of the material. The world is awfully big, and I haven't been exposed to near enough of it. My big sister lent me a copy of her Norton World Lit anthology that she used in college which was published in 1985. There is only about two selections in the entire book that I don't consider white and western, and therefore, not really what I want my class to be about.

Why did I think I would have the whole semester planned out, not only reading selections but even lesson plans done for each day, before school started? I clearly had lost my mind.

But, I love this part.

I spoke with my department head the other day and she told me I will have MY VERY OWN CLASSROOM!!! I thought I'd have to camp out in the electricity classroom in the vocational wing first semester and then wander around like a lost soul with a cart second semester, but no, somehow the wonderful people found me a room.

306

Isn't it wonderful? This is clearly a very good sign for the future because 306 is also the number of my condo. The coincidence certainly says "home" does it not?

I spoke to my assistant principal this morning, and she told me more about my room. She said, "Welcome to inner city education." It doesn't have desks for the students or me, and they aren't sure if they'll arrive by the time school starts, but whatever, it's a room. I will make it home.

tech fresh

I guess Duke's tuition has recently gone up because the school will now be providing new ipods to the entire freshman class. Cost and class issues aside, this is a super cool idea. I got an ipod over the weekend as a graduation gift, and I had no idea it did other stuff besides store music. The address book and calendar function just like a simplified pda, and there are also games! Teaching freshlings how to stay on schedule is certainly one of the hardest things I can imagine, so shout out to Duke for coming up with a nifty fun way to do it. Now, if only you could blog via ipod...

Thanks to boing boing for the link.

done with that degree, now really time for beddie bye

ha HA!

I'm done I'm done I'm done

I do a happy dance around my blog

'cause now I'm done

I'm done I'm done I'm done

ha HA!

Measure by Measure

I'm ashamed to admit that according to the Eats, Shoots and Leaves fascists, I am 100% STICKLER.

Although, I do hope this bodes well for my History of the English Language final on Monday.

There will be diagramming of sentences.

Somehow, I got through almost 26 years of my life, an undergraduate education and most of a master's degree without knowing the mysterious art. Yet, here I am trying to decipher which way the little slash marky thing shall go.

Any imagined self-importance about finishing this degree on Monday, or about myself in general, has officially flown out the window.

But, take the quiz and take pleasure in the illusion of your own elitism. It's fun, I swear.


Thanks to forward for the link.

ps. Take every single comma out of the above post. Do they really make any difference? Wouldn't it have sounded more like the sentences do in my head were they not there?

I Just Thought They'd Find Usama

All it takes to kick me right out of my good student-like last week of grad school hiatus is a good bit of scary theorizing about the election.

But, before I get to that...

Have I mentioned yet that I am really happy Kerry picked Edwards? First, he's a cutie, and I like all the talk about how the Kerry/Edwards ticket has the best hair. Second, Edwards is a good North Carolina boy (they're always "boys", ya every notice that?) and I'm a fan of, the few and far in-between, positive representations of the South in the media. Third, he just makes me happy. I dunno why, but I just get a dumb grin when I watch him speak. I glory in his unpretentiousness and caring attitude.

All that plus now I don't have to feel guilty anymore for having donated money to both their campaigns. Before I just felt like I was cheating on each of them.

And, you know, I like his policy ideas and stuff, especially about healthcare and education. But, since there's a bunch of folks in this fabulous country who apparently vote based on bumper stickers, all that fluffy stuff counts too.

Now for the scary, hopefully conspiracy theory, stuff about the election. Before I was only worried about improper use of voting machines (a post soon will tell you of scary voting things in my old neighborhood). Now, we've got bigger issues.

Check out these posts at Talking Points Memo, Daily Kos, and the Washington Monthly.

A Response to "Control Room"

Control Room, an independent documentary directed by Jehane Noujaim, investigates the Al-Jazeera news channel. She focuses the lens on a few major characters at Al-Jazeera, both on and off screen, to gather their attitudes toward towards journalism and the war in Iraq. The irony of American ignorance about the Middle East shows up in great relief as the American and Iraqi points of view are compared. While one Al-Jazeera reporter characterizes the US as having a “Democratize or I’ll shoot you” attitude, the Centcom spokesman confirms the entry of the military into Baghdad, but insists that they “didn’t want to.” Even as America and American interests control Iraq, the American government continues to insist any negative reports come from the “evil,” “animal,” “nationalistic” and “overemotional” Iraqis in the face of a war approved, as Bush states, by the “Almighty.”

American news channels demonize Al-Jazeera without allowing them a voice on their programming. Countless experts, advisors and insiders appear 24 hours a day on these channels and very, very few are from Iraq or other Middle Eastern countries. The few Arabs interviewed have lived in America for many years, have been schooled in America and now work for American governmental or educational institutions. Al-Jazeera, on the other hand, asks the American government and American experts to share their point of view and analysis on their channel. Several of the main reporters and the head of Al-Jazeera state that they make a concerted effort to remain balanced in their coverage of the war. They do not want to air anti-American sentiment without real analysis of the issues. One reporter wants his children to study in the US and then settle there. He says he would take a job at FOX if he were offered one. The people at Al-Jazeera are a far cry from the fundamentalist, extremists they are made out to be in the American media.

To adequately represent a range of analysis about the war, some reports may not be positive about the US (I know! The US can be wrong. Who knew?!). Al-Jazeera news reporters interview analysts who believe the United States wants control of Iraqi oil, Iraqi politics, and, eventually, control of the entire region. One man interviewed believes the US media “hijacked” the American people by helping to encourage high levels of fear. He felt the American government uses the color terror alerts to make Americans “always feel under siege.” Then the government connects the threat of Sadaam to that fear, creating the public support for attacking Iraq. Michael Moore makes similar comments about the government using fear to drive the right wing agenda. Some might consider this propaganda.

Most Americans probably do not fully understand America’s reasons for attacking Iraq, even American soldiers. In Al-Jazeera footage, reporters ask, in English, for their names and why they have come to Iraq. Every single solider interviewed states clearly that they are in Iraq because they “follow orders.” Not one could state why they were there. On the other hand, individuals resisting American forces, when interviewed on the street (in English by the American reporters), know exactly why they resist.

Rumsfeld says, “Al-Jazeera plays propaganda over and over and over again.” He accuses the news network of planting women and children at bomb scenes to create an unfavorable picture of the war, and also generally accuses the network of lying. On another occasion, he says the regime plants women and children in front of troops to form a human shield. The representation made by Rumsfeld and most American media outlets leads many Americans to feel like Al-Jazeera is biased towards Islamic extremists and Sadaam. In Iraq, however, resistance forces and Arab governments protest Al-Jazeera, accusing them of pandering to US policy. Both sides view Al-Jazeera as the enemy. The “us” vs. “them” model clearly will not hold up under scrutiny.

The Bush government also accuses Al-Jazeera of covering news in a very overemotional way. They say this type of coverage sensationalizes the war and incites animosity towards the US. After 9/11 in the US, American news reporters were very emotional as they covered the attacks at the World Trade Center and Pentagon. This was normal and acceptable. The emotions characterized as “American patriotism” are seen in Iraq as “Arab nationalism.” Where American emotions are for their country, Iraqi emotions are for their entire region. This attitude lumps all Arabs together, combining different religious, cultural and ethnic groups, denying their individuality as people and separate countries. Additionally, “patriotism” is an American value that is viewed in a very positive light, but “nationalism” carries a connotation of unrest, disorder and threat.

The head of aljazeera.net questions the whole premise of journalistic objectivity. Americans do not expect reporters to be objective when they cover horrific events in their home country. How can Americans expect Iraqi reporters to maintain an impossible standard? As the aljazeera.net spokeswoman said, “Objectivity is a mirage.”

The American government chastises Al-Jazeera for airing photographs of dead American soldiers. Rumsfeld and others hold press conferences and accuse Al-Jazeera of violating the Geneva Convention and threaten to take action against them. At the same time, American news networks air footage of dead Iraqis at Basra. To American leadership, somehow, pictures of the Iraqi dead did not count. The Centcom spokesman said he was not as bothered to see pictures of the “other” dead. Some Americans do not view them as human. Their human nature and emotional sensibilities only kick in once the dead are American.

The American government believes they can easily control both Americans and Iraqis. The American government routinely controls the message of the war. On the day that American forces invaded Baghdad, exercising their promise to shock and awe and killing hundreds, CNN covered endless stories about the rescue of Jessica Lynch. Americans turn on the television to see what appear to be rejoicing “liberated” Iraqis congregating on the town square to take down a massive statue of Sadaam. The media and the government want people to view America as the liberator of an oppressed people. As the liberator, they tell stories of Iraqis showering soldiers with Iraqi currency and thank yous. The “Iraqis” on the square, however, are really Kurds paid to take down the statue with the help of an American tank. The money the people threw was old money no longer in circulation. The American military conveniently bombed all the Arab news headquarters the day before the “liberation” so that the world only got the American perspective, victory instead of the surrounding death and dismemberment.

Americans are ridiculously dense to think a people may be so easily controlled, but the real problem is, they do not even seem to care about any opinion outside of the West as long as the approval ratings for the President stay respectable. CNN shows footage of a man yelling and the reporter tells us he is cheering for Bush, cheering for his liberation. But they do not speak Arabic. They do not hear he really says, “Americans are animals. They are scum.”


References:
Control Room. Dir. Jehane Noujaim. Perf. Hassan Ibrahim, Tom Mintier. 2004.
Said, Edward W. Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1978.

Ok, I'll Shut Up For Awhile

I am taking a vacation from this blog. After I graduate on July 19, rest for exactly one week and then start teaching on July 28, I will return to amuse you will stories about my students and mishaps as a newbie teacher.

And perhaps a 12 step program for recovering from teacher preperation programs in grad school.

Take care.