It is 26 minutes away from my 37th birthday as I begin writing this. For the past 2 and 1/2 hours, it has been my birthday on the East Coast. Today, I began an art project I have been thinking about for some time. Today, Casey Anthony was found Not Guilty of committing murder, child abuse nor manslaughter. Today, my wife and I sat down to watch Goodnight in the Garden of Good and Evil for the first time. A line from the movie struck me." I would rather be committed of lying, then of murder." Today, I wonder why did the author choose these words?
However they came to this quote, I find it strangely coincidental to todays activities. Casey Anthony was convicted on Lying to Authorities. But not of murder, neglect nor accidental death, though her defense was it was an accidental death. So many people were outraged. Others found solace in our Justice systems ability to not convict an individual based on circumstantial evidence. I find myself asking about the life of the little girl.
I must admit, that I myself have been fascinated by the case from it's conception. Not because of the Media Sensationalism, nor the concept of a mother neglecting a child so severe that it caused the child her life. My fascination stemmed from the small world of my wife knowing, very personally, the brother of Casey Anthony. This made the circumstances much more relevant for me. This was a young girl, from Orlando, Florida that grew up in the Fantasia Effect of Disney Magic which paints a subconscious backdrop to everyone that lives there. This was a fantastical dream turned to a horrific nightmare with the simple paint of a brush, unlike Walt Disney's.
This was a pile of evidence that painted a picture of lies, deceit, denial, and fabrication. Not too far off from a Disney movie, but with a completely different twist. The daughter entitled herself as a "victim" while in prison. She tainted her brother and father as child molesters. She fabricated a story so detailed with color and characters, that it could have been pitched as a Hanna Montana episode, minus the child death. But what continued the fairy tale was the defenses announcement of the cause of death. More fantastical then Fantasia ever could have imagined. But even as truth, could not have predicted an outcome so far fetched.
Someone posted that it's good we live in a world that has a justice system that doesn't hail women as witches as they did in the Salem witch trial (especially because my wife was born in Salem, Mass.). But I have to ask, How did they convict people prior to Forensic Evidence and episodes of CSI, Miami? Unless the knife was in the killers hand, it was always circumstantial. At some point, we look at the material and say, yep, it was her. I agree, many, many, many people have been put behind bars for reasons that did not fit the crime. Like blackmail or being a black male. But not calling to say your daughter has drowned in a pool or that she was kidnapped by Zanny the Nanny for 31 days is beyond comprehension. Is there a parent out there in the world who can empathize with this decision? PLEASE WRITE A RESPONSE EXPLAINING HOW AND WHY?
But as the clock strikes midnight and I turn a year older, I think about Caylee. I have heard so much about the justice system and Casey Anthony and the attorneys... but what I don't hear enough of, is that a young, defenseless, innocent child was murdered. I say that knowing that people will say, "You don't know that!" But I do. I know, that if a child dies in an accidental drowning, there is no need to place duct tape on her mouth. For she is already dead. I know that you don't hide a toddlers body in the woods, blocks from your house in a trash bag, being your daughter, if it was an accidental drowning. I know that you don't continue on with life, going to bars, clubs, getting tattoos, when you just hid your child's remains in a trash bag, down the street from your house. How do I know this? Because I have morals, I have reason and I am not a christian, and therefore I judge. I judge everyday. And the jurors of this court were too damn scared to simply judge another human being on horrendous actions that resulted in a child's death. On this birthday, I simply wish that humanity, reason and judgement be a guiding force in society. So that another child doesn't have to go through a torturous minute of existence in this psychopathic and neurotic adult world that they are thrust upon, with no ability to defend or voice their concerns.
For a family encased in Disney culture and ideals, it seems that uncle Walt has escaped them. Or has he created a world where it is too impossible to understand that horrific things happen to people every day. And if we just deny that it happened, it will all go away. It will all go away. It will all go away. Just like Caylee Anthony.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Words, Friends, and Facebook
Over the past year, I, and society, has begun to take a deeper look at the connection Facebook has on our culture, in America and abroad. Facebook, as we all have seen in the Aaron Sorkin oscar winning script, was developed by a techniculture cyber boy creatively playing with technology to relieve angst and activate intellectual capacities. No matter how it was intended to be used, it surely has morphed into something not even the creator could have imagined. Facebook has taken on a life of its own in our American culture, and beyond. But my question is, what is it doing to us as human creatures, our psyche's, our connection through real existence, not a virtual one?
Granted, I am addicted to Facebook. I post how I'm feeling about the upcoming game. The joy of the win. What I think about the conservative left at times of ignorance. I have gotten into verbal bashings with people I hardly know. I have also been "friended", a word I'll look at later, by complete strangers who have liked what I have said in my ranting to those acquaintances (which are friends of the acquaintance). I love the instant gratification I get when I see another stupid republican try to manipulate people and I can go type out my frustration to an audience. But is this immediacy, a good thing? I, as an intelligent human being, seem to just be venting emotional steam for selfish reasons. My discourse is not planned, there is no presentational thought going into my words, my position, my need to express the ludicrous logic and reasoning of the conservative position. I'm just doing the same thing as them, am I not? Debate, discourse, argumentation, presentation are all very old rhetorical processes that have been used by intellectuals to challenge or change or reinforce a position in our society. They require thought, research, inquiry, drafting, and editing to be done with diligence and respectability. A three sentence blurt of emotional garbage does not do this process justice. It sure ain't going to change anyone's mind. It simply rally's the troops and alienates the opposition.
The concept of "Friend" has dramatically changed from the time of Facebooks creation. To start off, it is a fantastic tool to keep in touch with distant friends and family on a regular basis, all together on one site. The word friend prior to facebook meant "a person with whom one knows and with whom one has a bond of mutual affection, typically exclusive of sexual or family relations" But what facebook has done is redefine the word "Friend." In order to have someone see your page, you have to accept their "Friend" request. This does not mean that you "know" this person or especially that you "have a bond of mutual affection." To give an example... I have met several people through my wife and I's (mostly wifes) affection for Dave Matthews Band. We meet many people that we see an hour before the show, share a drink, talk Dave-speak, and may sit together in the lawn. But in 95% of those meetings, no deeper sharing of human bond is reached, no intimate, deep dark secrets are revealed, no political or religious beliefs transpire in any way. But after the concert weekend has concluded, several "friend" requests seep through my monitor for weeks at a time. These people that I have met seem to have liked my persona, my character, my part of me that I share in times of Eating, Drinking and Being Merry. But the major problem here then lies in the definition of "Friend" and the facebooks morphing definition.
These individuals do no "know" me or "share a mutual affection." And this is where it gets tricky with language, words, and such. Have they met me? Emphatically, yes. Do they share a "mutual affection" in DMB with me? Emphatically, yes (though, they often much more than me). But this is not the meaning of the words in the definition. What these individuals are doing is playing with the semantics of the word "Friend," which in essence was began with Facebook.
So, what are semantics? Semantics are the study of meaning in words. It focuses on the relation between signifiers, such as words, phrases, signs and symbols, and what they stand for. To "know" someone could mean that they have met them once or have slept in a dungeon with them as a prisoner. It is where this statement comes from... "I know you know her, but do you really know her." Or "Do we ever really know someone?" The word know can hold many meanings, or put another way, can have a deeper meaning. "I am not as close with my friend Bill as I am with Kenny. Therefore, Kenny knows me on a deeper level than Bill knows me."
Do you see how that works? Fascinating isn't it?!
But the point of this discussion is this. We "Friend" people on facebook that we have met, or are acquaintances with, but we are not truly "Friends" as in the prior meaning of the word. These people did not realize I was a bleeding heart liberal, who loves punk music and believes that religion is the key poison that kills everything good about humanity. If they did, do you think they would still have "Friended" me? But also, when someone "DeFriends" a person, there is a level of rejection. It gives us pause, just a little, but it does. Just from an act on a silly website. But it's not the act, I say, it's the words we have evolved to connect to the use of Facebook. When we "Defriend" someone, we are saying to them that I do not want to share this space with you. But what is even harder for me to wrap my head around, it that this space is virtual... meaning "not physically existing." It's not real, except in the use of language. Language is what makes it real. It's what makes us give pause. It's what makes so many people happy to say, "I have 1,254 'Friends' on facebook."
But what's great about facebook, besides keeping up with old friends, family members and my kids (students), is that those acquaintances that I have met at those DMB shows and beyond, I can get to know better. I can have deeper conversations, make plans to share more time, and finally, share intimate secrets when it's time to. And then, and only then, can they truly be called FRIENDS.
Granted, I am addicted to Facebook. I post how I'm feeling about the upcoming game. The joy of the win. What I think about the conservative left at times of ignorance. I have gotten into verbal bashings with people I hardly know. I have also been "friended", a word I'll look at later, by complete strangers who have liked what I have said in my ranting to those acquaintances (which are friends of the acquaintance). I love the instant gratification I get when I see another stupid republican try to manipulate people and I can go type out my frustration to an audience. But is this immediacy, a good thing? I, as an intelligent human being, seem to just be venting emotional steam for selfish reasons. My discourse is not planned, there is no presentational thought going into my words, my position, my need to express the ludicrous logic and reasoning of the conservative position. I'm just doing the same thing as them, am I not? Debate, discourse, argumentation, presentation are all very old rhetorical processes that have been used by intellectuals to challenge or change or reinforce a position in our society. They require thought, research, inquiry, drafting, and editing to be done with diligence and respectability. A three sentence blurt of emotional garbage does not do this process justice. It sure ain't going to change anyone's mind. It simply rally's the troops and alienates the opposition.
The concept of "Friend" has dramatically changed from the time of Facebooks creation. To start off, it is a fantastic tool to keep in touch with distant friends and family on a regular basis, all together on one site. The word friend prior to facebook meant "a person with whom one knows and with whom one has a bond of mutual affection, typically exclusive of sexual or family relations" But what facebook has done is redefine the word "Friend." In order to have someone see your page, you have to accept their "Friend" request. This does not mean that you "know" this person or especially that you "have a bond of mutual affection." To give an example... I have met several people through my wife and I's (mostly wifes) affection for Dave Matthews Band. We meet many people that we see an hour before the show, share a drink, talk Dave-speak, and may sit together in the lawn. But in 95% of those meetings, no deeper sharing of human bond is reached, no intimate, deep dark secrets are revealed, no political or religious beliefs transpire in any way. But after the concert weekend has concluded, several "friend" requests seep through my monitor for weeks at a time. These people that I have met seem to have liked my persona, my character, my part of me that I share in times of Eating, Drinking and Being Merry. But the major problem here then lies in the definition of "Friend" and the facebooks morphing definition.
These individuals do no "know" me or "share a mutual affection." And this is where it gets tricky with language, words, and such. Have they met me? Emphatically, yes. Do they share a "mutual affection" in DMB with me? Emphatically, yes (though, they often much more than me). But this is not the meaning of the words in the definition. What these individuals are doing is playing with the semantics of the word "Friend," which in essence was began with Facebook.
So, what are semantics? Semantics are the study of meaning in words. It focuses on the relation between signifiers, such as words, phrases, signs and symbols, and what they stand for. To "know" someone could mean that they have met them once or have slept in a dungeon with them as a prisoner. It is where this statement comes from... "I know you know her, but do you really know her." Or "Do we ever really know someone?" The word know can hold many meanings, or put another way, can have a deeper meaning. "I am not as close with my friend Bill as I am with Kenny. Therefore, Kenny knows me on a deeper level than Bill knows me."
Do you see how that works? Fascinating isn't it?!
But the point of this discussion is this. We "Friend" people on facebook that we have met, or are acquaintances with, but we are not truly "Friends" as in the prior meaning of the word. These people did not realize I was a bleeding heart liberal, who loves punk music and believes that religion is the key poison that kills everything good about humanity. If they did, do you think they would still have "Friended" me? But also, when someone "DeFriends" a person, there is a level of rejection. It gives us pause, just a little, but it does. Just from an act on a silly website. But it's not the act, I say, it's the words we have evolved to connect to the use of Facebook. When we "Defriend" someone, we are saying to them that I do not want to share this space with you. But what is even harder for me to wrap my head around, it that this space is virtual... meaning "not physically existing." It's not real, except in the use of language. Language is what makes it real. It's what makes us give pause. It's what makes so many people happy to say, "I have 1,254 'Friends' on facebook."
But what's great about facebook, besides keeping up with old friends, family members and my kids (students), is that those acquaintances that I have met at those DMB shows and beyond, I can get to know better. I can have deeper conversations, make plans to share more time, and finally, share intimate secrets when it's time to. And then, and only then, can they truly be called FRIENDS.
Monday, April 4, 2011
The Student Athlete, Capitalism and Anti-education
Very recently I watched an episode of Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel that did a feature story on paying student athletes. This topic has become one of hot debate as of the past decade with universities, companies, and countless others making substantial amounts of money from student athletics, while the students themselves get almost nothing. Many people on the show, on the round table discussion, and elsewhere on this topic, seem to be on the side of universities paying our athletes for their duties. As if, the act itself of participating, or the education a student gets is not enough.
Let me first say that I am fundamentally against this concept of paying a student a salary to play in a game that is for a college team. I also, do not agree that the act of playing itself, nor the small scholarships that one gets, if they get one at all, is enough.
So, the questions become, 1) what is the real problem of student athletics and the capitalism structure, 2) what are the consequences for these problems and actions, and finally, 3) how do we fix the problem for the long term betterment of our society, the education system and the students?
First, identifying the real issues that surround our student athletes and all the money being made from their talents and hard work. Students say the issue is that everyone else is getting paid from the games they play in, but they see nothing. It must be noted that schools only have a certain number of scholarships for their players, meaning many players must pay full tuition, plus the cost of living as a student athlete. Also, the scholarships that are given do not give funds for living expenses in most cases, and never fully fund the cost of life as a student, let alone a student athlete. Universities, coaches, broadcasting companies, announcers, journalists, athletic apparel companies, and restaurants/bars all make very large sums of money in one aspect or another from these games and players. None of it coming back to the players themselves. But this is not the problem. The players not getting a paycheck is not the problem. The problem is that we as a society are exploiting these student athletes as an entertainment work force for the profitable gain of others. Now, I use the term "work force" purposefully. It is due to the fact that coaches, parents, secondary schools and universities downplay the educational role of a 'student' while attending academia, for the purpose of the 'athlete role' to be focused upon for revenue gains and fame from a very young age. This is a problem of perception and applied expectation, not a matter of finance, and it stems from capitalism.
Capitalism is a form of economic system that controls trade and industry for capital gains, or profit. But originally, state schools were looked at as institutions of learning for the development of a work force that was intellectually capable of continuing the development of our democratic country. This has changed in all aspects of education, I would argue. Education has now become a part of the capitalism engine of producing profit everywhere, and at all cost. Everywhere means that in areas that once were considered off limits for 'profit gain' are now suddenly in play. Education was a sanctity of ideology, no matter if you were a conservative or progressive. Education was where all social classes could develop a trade, a set of knowledge or both, in order to better themselves emotionally, intellectually and economically, which in turn helped the social structure develop into a stronger labor force and creative thinking force to develop innovative products and living conditions. That no longer exists today. Education is now the force of which corporate-minded development is cultivated for the purpose of profit gain. This has leaked into the realm of college athletics. Students now see themselves as employees of companies (the universities) without being compensated for the their labor. And being a student athlete is not easy, it is hard work. But corporations and companies will not give a piece of the pie to "kids" as they put it. (I often find it strange that we relate to 21 year old men/women that are in college as "kids" and 21 year old carpenters with a wife and children as "adults").
So what is the solution? It is a difficult one, and one that the corporate CEO's (university presidents) must agree to before it can work. And as we have seen in the past decade, CEO's are not interested in helping the lower classes, and that goes for University Presidents, as well. Universities are being run more and more like businesses every year. With growth and profit being a part of their process thinking. With the profit that comes from these college athletics, in areas that can be regulated, build an account of finances that go to the schools students, the student athletes and local state secondary students. First, use portions of the money to fund parts of the academic halls that are the real reason why students attend such universities. Develop programs that cultivate the universities as a learning institutions again, not corporate factories. Second, provide every student athlete with a full scholarship, living expenses and weekly allowance to live. Provide classes that teach these athletes what an education can do for them over the course of their life span (a college graduate will make $1 million dollars more over their lifetime then a non-college graduate). Have these classes teach them to see the long term goals of success, not just the quick financial gains that end up being the root of more problems then they had before they received the money. And finally, develop community programs in secondary schools that teach a perception of education as a valuable commodity, rather than a waste of time. Cultivate a culture of academic achievement for intrinsic purposes, not just financial gains. Develop comprehension of civic duty through education, which in the end builds a stronger civilian population.
But all this must first be dealt with in the halls of perception of what capitalism is doing to our society. We value money more than family, education, community or even self. Capitalism can do great things when handled correctly. But like everything we have seen in history, all philosophies fail to deliver a lasting practical approach. Progress is a necessary process for humanity to exist. We must change and alter and evolve with the world. And where this all begins is in how we educate our citizens, perceive our value of commodities, and balance our existence with our experiences. The concept of student athletes is just one area we can begin this process.
So, tell me. What do you think?
JP Wilson Gabor
Let me first say that I am fundamentally against this concept of paying a student a salary to play in a game that is for a college team. I also, do not agree that the act of playing itself, nor the small scholarships that one gets, if they get one at all, is enough.
So, the questions become, 1) what is the real problem of student athletics and the capitalism structure, 2) what are the consequences for these problems and actions, and finally, 3) how do we fix the problem for the long term betterment of our society, the education system and the students?
First, identifying the real issues that surround our student athletes and all the money being made from their talents and hard work. Students say the issue is that everyone else is getting paid from the games they play in, but they see nothing. It must be noted that schools only have a certain number of scholarships for their players, meaning many players must pay full tuition, plus the cost of living as a student athlete. Also, the scholarships that are given do not give funds for living expenses in most cases, and never fully fund the cost of life as a student, let alone a student athlete. Universities, coaches, broadcasting companies, announcers, journalists, athletic apparel companies, and restaurants/bars all make very large sums of money in one aspect or another from these games and players. None of it coming back to the players themselves. But this is not the problem. The players not getting a paycheck is not the problem. The problem is that we as a society are exploiting these student athletes as an entertainment work force for the profitable gain of others. Now, I use the term "work force" purposefully. It is due to the fact that coaches, parents, secondary schools and universities downplay the educational role of a 'student' while attending academia, for the purpose of the 'athlete role' to be focused upon for revenue gains and fame from a very young age. This is a problem of perception and applied expectation, not a matter of finance, and it stems from capitalism.
Capitalism is a form of economic system that controls trade and industry for capital gains, or profit. But originally, state schools were looked at as institutions of learning for the development of a work force that was intellectually capable of continuing the development of our democratic country. This has changed in all aspects of education, I would argue. Education has now become a part of the capitalism engine of producing profit everywhere, and at all cost. Everywhere means that in areas that once were considered off limits for 'profit gain' are now suddenly in play. Education was a sanctity of ideology, no matter if you were a conservative or progressive. Education was where all social classes could develop a trade, a set of knowledge or both, in order to better themselves emotionally, intellectually and economically, which in turn helped the social structure develop into a stronger labor force and creative thinking force to develop innovative products and living conditions. That no longer exists today. Education is now the force of which corporate-minded development is cultivated for the purpose of profit gain. This has leaked into the realm of college athletics. Students now see themselves as employees of companies (the universities) without being compensated for the their labor. And being a student athlete is not easy, it is hard work. But corporations and companies will not give a piece of the pie to "kids" as they put it. (I often find it strange that we relate to 21 year old men/women that are in college as "kids" and 21 year old carpenters with a wife and children as "adults").
So what is the solution? It is a difficult one, and one that the corporate CEO's (university presidents) must agree to before it can work. And as we have seen in the past decade, CEO's are not interested in helping the lower classes, and that goes for University Presidents, as well. Universities are being run more and more like businesses every year. With growth and profit being a part of their process thinking. With the profit that comes from these college athletics, in areas that can be regulated, build an account of finances that go to the schools students, the student athletes and local state secondary students. First, use portions of the money to fund parts of the academic halls that are the real reason why students attend such universities. Develop programs that cultivate the universities as a learning institutions again, not corporate factories. Second, provide every student athlete with a full scholarship, living expenses and weekly allowance to live. Provide classes that teach these athletes what an education can do for them over the course of their life span (a college graduate will make $1 million dollars more over their lifetime then a non-college graduate). Have these classes teach them to see the long term goals of success, not just the quick financial gains that end up being the root of more problems then they had before they received the money. And finally, develop community programs in secondary schools that teach a perception of education as a valuable commodity, rather than a waste of time. Cultivate a culture of academic achievement for intrinsic purposes, not just financial gains. Develop comprehension of civic duty through education, which in the end builds a stronger civilian population.
But all this must first be dealt with in the halls of perception of what capitalism is doing to our society. We value money more than family, education, community or even self. Capitalism can do great things when handled correctly. But like everything we have seen in history, all philosophies fail to deliver a lasting practical approach. Progress is a necessary process for humanity to exist. We must change and alter and evolve with the world. And where this all begins is in how we educate our citizens, perceive our value of commodities, and balance our existence with our experiences. The concept of student athletes is just one area we can begin this process.
So, tell me. What do you think?
JP Wilson Gabor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)