Blog Post 1 - How We Receive Messages
We are restricted every day in how we process the messages we receive daily. When it comes to the messages we receive and how we interpret them, our ideologies can stand in the way of our comprehension. The medium itself often serves as a distraction as well when we are faced with messages that we must decipher. Culturally we’ve been trained to either assume meanings or overlook them. The most significant elements of any human culture are channeled through words, and reside in the particular range of meanings and attitudes which members of any society attach to their verbal symbols (Goody and Watt 305).
In an instance in my own life, I have experienced the struggle that can go alongside of differing ideologies attempting to make sense of literacy. Growing up as a child, I loved to bake. I remember making a boxed brownie recipe and the instructions informing me to "mix by hand." Obviously I thought it was odd, nevertheless I rolled up my sleeves and got wrist deep into the batter, mixing the brownies with my fingers. My mother walked in and was baffled as to how I had gotten myself into the situation. Once I explained myself, she laughed and explained that I had misunderstood the instructions. I was confused however, because as far as I knew, I was mixing the batter, and using my hands, just as I had been instructed. My ideologogy differed from the typical person reading the box, who the directions were intended for. I was unaware fo the baking term, "mix by hands," and that it simply meant to use a spoon or any non electric mixing style.
Personal ideologies are the reason we hold the definitions we do, though they are complex in nature given that every single person holds different ideologies and beliefs when it comes to language. Over time certain words become associated with specific meanings and those meanings become fixed in our lives. We've grown up being told what the word orange means and what to think when we see that word. Our minds think of a fruit, or the color, depending on context. While the definitions we hold are not necessarily true or untrue, they prevent us from further developing thoughts and processing meaning when it comes to the literary practices we have.
In an instance in my own life, I have experienced the struggle that can go alongside of differing ideologies attempting to make sense of literacy. Growing up as a child, I loved to bake. I remember making a boxed brownie recipe and the instructions informing me to "mix by hand." Obviously I thought it was odd, nevertheless I rolled up my sleeves and got wrist deep into the batter, mixing the brownies with my fingers. My mother walked in and was baffled as to how I had gotten myself into the situation. Once I explained myself, she laughed and explained that I had misunderstood the instructions. I was confused however, because as far as I knew, I was mixing the batter, and using my hands, just as I had been instructed. My ideologogy differed from the typical person reading the box, who the directions were intended for. I was unaware fo the baking term, "mix by hands," and that it simply meant to use a spoon or any non electric mixing style.
Personal ideologies are the reason we hold the definitions we do, though they are complex in nature given that every single person holds different ideologies and beliefs when it comes to language. Over time certain words become associated with specific meanings and those meanings become fixed in our lives. We've grown up being told what the word orange means and what to think when we see that word. Our minds think of a fruit, or the color, depending on context. While the definitions we hold are not necessarily true or untrue, they prevent us from further developing thoughts and processing meaning when it comes to the literary practices we have.
Blog Post 2 - Is the Medium the Message?
Just as our literary ideologies restrict our interpretation of meaning, our habit of focusing on the content of the message rather than the medium itself can hinder us as well. McLuhan exposes our thought process as biased towards the content when given messages since that’s how we are trained to see news. A light bulb produces light, as the content informs us. However, by instilling in ourselves the priority of message over content, we overlook a bigger picture of sorts in our literacy.
If we were to remain ignorant of the medium in which we receive literacy, it will only hinder our full comprehension of any information we receive. It is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action (McLuhan 2). By looking instead at how we got the message, we can better form our opinions and thoughts of it. Gaining a message by way of the radio is going to differ from watching that same message on the television.
Salt Lake Valley recently experienced an earthquake. When we typically learn of natural disasters from another part of the world on television, we see the face of the reporter and footage from the sight. We begin to process the message that people are hurt and they are sad, because we can see both of those messages clearly on our screen. When the earthquake occurred this past week, I received texts and calls from family members wanting to confirm I was alright and uninjured. Typically when we read text messages, we would associate the message with the words we read and the friend that sent us the message. Sending messages that an earthquake occurred allowed us to still process that something bad is happening, but not in the same way as we did because the different mediums allowed for completely different messages to be received. When I informed my step mother—who lives in Los Angeles, California— that the earthquake was a 5.7, she simply laughed and joked that Salt Lake knows nothing when it comes to earthquakes. The medium (a phone call) was unable to transfer the same message that a video call or face to face conversation could. She couldn't see fear in my face or pick up one physical clues. The medium itself is more important than we ever realized. It has the power of imposing its own assumptions on the unwary (McLuhan 6).
If we were to remain ignorant of the medium in which we receive literacy, it will only hinder our full comprehension of any information we receive. It is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action (McLuhan 2). By looking instead at how we got the message, we can better form our opinions and thoughts of it. Gaining a message by way of the radio is going to differ from watching that same message on the television.
Salt Lake Valley recently experienced an earthquake. When we typically learn of natural disasters from another part of the world on television, we see the face of the reporter and footage from the sight. We begin to process the message that people are hurt and they are sad, because we can see both of those messages clearly on our screen. When the earthquake occurred this past week, I received texts and calls from family members wanting to confirm I was alright and uninjured. Typically when we read text messages, we would associate the message with the words we read and the friend that sent us the message. Sending messages that an earthquake occurred allowed us to still process that something bad is happening, but not in the same way as we did because the different mediums allowed for completely different messages to be received. When I informed my step mother—who lives in Los Angeles, California— that the earthquake was a 5.7, she simply laughed and joked that Salt Lake knows nothing when it comes to earthquakes. The medium (a phone call) was unable to transfer the same message that a video call or face to face conversation could. She couldn't see fear in my face or pick up one physical clues. The medium itself is more important than we ever realized. It has the power of imposing its own assumptions on the unwary (McLuhan 6).
Blog Post 3 - Literacy and Mediums
The meanings of words are not fixed and settled once and for all in terms of definition (Gee 10). Gee explains how instead of a word being correlated with a meaning, we should explore the idea of a story being told by that word. Something more than the dictionary explanation of what we should think. If we are ever to fully be able to discern honest meaning from any form of literacy, we must first recognize the bias we hold. When attempting to gain meaning from a passage or word, we often rely on our ideologies to tell us what to think.
As a society we often ignore the medium of a message and rely on our personal ideologies when it comes to interpreting that message. This cuts us off at our knees and prevents further exploration into the depth of literacy and it’s full components. We must prioritize the medium before the message and learn to look at the word as more than we assume it to be. We must remove the glasses that have been placed on our eyes when it comes to the way we perceive literary messages.
Something both Gee and McLuhan seem to agree on is the reliance we as a culture have on our ideologies when we should be analyzing and studying the message and words themselves when we are faced with them. Too often I misunderstand a situation due to my inability to fully recognize the circumstances. I have had times where my friends are expressing worry or are upset, but I misread a situation and react with humor due to my inability to asses my mediums, recognize my own ideologies and how they may lead me astray, and fully study the situation as a whole.
As a society we often ignore the medium of a message and rely on our personal ideologies when it comes to interpreting that message. This cuts us off at our knees and prevents further exploration into the depth of literacy and it’s full components. We must prioritize the medium before the message and learn to look at the word as more than we assume it to be. We must remove the glasses that have been placed on our eyes when it comes to the way we perceive literary messages.
Something both Gee and McLuhan seem to agree on is the reliance we as a culture have on our ideologies when we should be analyzing and studying the message and words themselves when we are faced with them. Too often I misunderstand a situation due to my inability to fully recognize the circumstances. I have had times where my friends are expressing worry or are upset, but I misread a situation and react with humor due to my inability to asses my mediums, recognize my own ideologies and how they may lead me astray, and fully study the situation as a whole.
Predictions Concerning the Future of Writing
As it pertains to the mediums and messages, I believe that literacy will only expand in meaning and become even more vague of a concept than we know it to be now. I believe that we will gain more mediums over time and lose more of the message and we continue to misconstrue and filter the things we are told. I believe that our ideologies and how we are brought up will only further set us apart from one another and how we comprehend what is expressed to us. I think it'll get to a point where two strangers with nothing common in their backgrounds will suffer by never being able to understand what the other is expressing. We will become trapped beings only able to process what we're told if it's being delivered by someone who thinks as we do. It'll be a time where literacy falls short and miscommunication is common. Unfortunately people become stuck in their ways and biased concerning their own concepts and what they believe that they won't be open to new lessons and meanings. I think the future will bring with it a fuddled meaning of language and messages and it will be almost impossible to find what's right because no one will have a desire to.