If Music Could Talk

revbob wrote:What's the name of your class again?

"I'm Sorry: A Study of Canadian National Identity with Lumberjacks and Mounties and Shit: The Doctor Medulla Story: How Wire Affected Harper's Foreign Policy Directives Through Generational Turning: Eh?"

Flex wrote:

revbob wrote:What's the name of your class again?

"I'm Sorry: A Study of Canadian National Identity with Lumberjacks and Mounties and Shit: The Doctor Medulla Story: How Wire Affected Harper's Foreign Policy Directives Through Generational Turning: Eh?"

Apparently it's also a study in colon usage.

The blander (or Canadian) answer is A Social and Cultural History of Rock n Roll. But it's not that, really. It's a bit more methodological, albeit indirectly, to see how we can use popular music to investigate historical questions like protest, economic restructuring, race, sexual identity. It's not rock biography, but rock as a lens.

I'd like to take part in this, but I have literally no idea how much time I can devote, being freelance and all. Is there a spot for a wishy-washy participant?

Kory wrote:I'd like to take part in this, but I have literally no idea how much time I can devote, being freelance and all. Is there a spot for a wishy-washy participant?

I'm pretty sure I'm that slot already, but you can share the role.

Wolter wrote:

Kory wrote:I'd like to take part in this, but I have literally no idea how much time I can devote, being freelance and all. Is there a spot for a wishy-washy participant?

I'm pretty sure I'm that slot already, but you can share the role.

With our powers combined, we can almost be 50% committed!

Kory wrote:

Wolter wrote:

Kory wrote:I'd like to take part in this, but I have literally no idea how much time I can devote, being freelance and all. Is there a spot for a wishy-washy participant?

I'm pretty sure I'm that slot already, but you can share the role.

With our powers combined, we can almost be 50% committed!

Eh, that sounds like a lot of work.

My group are discussing that Beatles book tonight. I have their write-ups already and a good two-thirds despised it. I knew at least half would—with some justification—but most who did picked really strange reasons (he likes the band too much, it's just his opinions, he uses too many metaphors). Sigh. Poor historians aren't allowed to be creative or enjoy their work, I guess.

Dr. Medulla wrote:My group are discussing that Beatles book tonight. I have their write-ups already and a good two-thirds despised it. I knew at least half would—with some justification—but most who did picked really strange reasons (he likes the band too much, it's just his opinions, he uses too many metaphors). Sigh. Poor historians aren't allowed to be creative or enjoy their work, I guess.

WHY IS THIS BOOK NOT A LIST OF DATES, PERSONS, AND FACTS????!!!!

On a related note, I've noticed in my literature classes, particularly the 18th c., that people automatically believe whatever someone wrote about anything was a factual account. Almost all of my classmates assumed that what Lady Montagu described of Swift in her The Reasons that Induced Dr. S. to Write a Poem Call'd the Lady's Dressing Room were true.

What the fuck?

They also have not even a glimmer of anything approaching a Marxian or radical interpretation of history.

eumaas wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote:My group are discussing that Beatles book tonight. I have their write-ups already and a good two-thirds despised it. I knew at least half would—with some justification—but most who did picked really strange reasons (he likes the band too much, it's just his opinions, he uses too many metaphors). Sigh. Poor historians aren't allowed to be creative or enjoy their work, I guess.

WHY IS THIS BOOK NOT A LIST OF DATES, PERSONS, AND FACTS????!!!!

Because it's not history. Apparently.

eumaas wrote:On a related note, I've noticed in my literature classes, particularly the 18th c., that people automatically believe whatever someone wrote about anything was a factual account. Almost all of my classmates assumed that what Lady Montagu described of Swift in her The Reasons that Induced Dr. S. to Write a Poem Call'd the Lady's Dressing Room were true.

What the fuck?

They also have not even a glimmer of anything approaching a Marxian or radical interpretation of history.

Because the written word is magical. It really is and it's hard to train yourself to reject what is written. Perhaps it's because we're just better at deciphering verbal cues and the like, but people are better at spotting bullshit when it is spoken than when it is written.

Marxian interpretation of history? You jest, sir. We read a Marxian account of the rise of punk next week. I'm certain this will be their first exposure to that framing. I expect fun.

Brief update about my class last night and the Beatles book. A couple students were pretty vocal about their hostility to the book—and I appreciated that, just being passionate about assessing an author—but one guy totally got the argument and intent. Just completely, even suggesting aspects that I hadn't considered. Afterwards he told me that reading it was a revelation in terms of our relationship with history. He was already one of the best two students, but, damn, that was satisfying. If nothing else happens in the class the rest of the way, one person had that too-rare "holy fuck" intellectual moment (two others were basically in his camp, but I don't think they appreciated the significance quite as profoundly). There's a basic truism that if you can reach 10–15% of the students, that's a success, and I've found my 3 or 4 in a class of 24.

Dr. Medulla wrote:Brief update about my class last night and the Beatles book. A couple students were pretty vocal about their hostility to the book—and I appreciated that, just being passionate about assessing an author—but one guy totally got the argument and intent. Just completely, even suggesting aspects that I hadn't considered. Afterwards he told me that reading it was a revelation in terms of our relationship with history. He was already one of the best two students, but, damn, that was satisfying. If nothing else happens in the class the rest of the way, one person had that too-rare "holy fuck" intellectual moment (two others were basically in his camp, but I don't think they appreciated the significance quite as profoundly). There's a basic truism that if you can reach 10–15% of the students, that's a success, and I've found my 3 or 4 in a class of 24.

I have a historian friend who says he thinks he's probably just teaching for one student. Not that he isn't trying his best for everyone involved, but that he knows he probably isn't going to reach more than a handful of undergrads over his career.

I don't know if that's something peculiar to our times, either. Maybe it was always like that. That one medieval Saxon monk who gets real excited about Latin's quantitative measure or some shit, I dunno.

Dr. Medulla wrote:Brief update about my class last night and the Beatles book. A couple students were pretty vocal about their hostility to the book—and I appreciated that, just being passionate about assessing an author—but one guy totally got the argument and intent. Just completely, even suggesting aspects that I hadn't considered. Afterwards he told me that reading it was a revelation in terms of our relationship with history. He was already one of the best two students, but, damn, that was satisfying. If nothing else happens in the class the rest of the way, one person had that too-rare "holy fuck" intellectual moment (two others were basically in his camp, but I don't think they appreciated the significance quite as profoundly). There's a basic truism that if you can reach 10–15% of the students, that's a success, and I've found my 3 or 4 in a class of 24.

That's awesome.

eumaas wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote:Brief update about my class last night and the Beatles book. A couple students were pretty vocal about their hostility to the book—and I appreciated that, just being passionate about assessing an author—but one guy totally got the argument and intent. Just completely, even suggesting aspects that I hadn't considered. Afterwards he told me that reading it was a revelation in terms of our relationship with history. He was already one of the best two students, but, damn, that was satisfying. If nothing else happens in the class the rest of the way, one person had that too-rare "holy fuck" intellectual moment (two others were basically in his camp, but I don't think they appreciated the significance quite as profoundly). There's a basic truism that if you can reach 10–15% of the students, that's a success, and I've found my 3 or 4 in a class of 24.

I have a historian friend who says he thinks he's probably just teaching for one student. Not that he isn't trying his best for everyone involved, but that he knows he probably isn't going to reach more than a handful of undergrads over his career.

I admit that I possess a certain LBJ quality that I want to reach everyone, but I do know that the vast majority just don't care. Still, I get annoyed at myself that I can't get those students more excited and critically engaged.

I don't know if that's something peculiar to our times, either. Maybe it was always like that. That one medieval Saxon monk who gets real excited about Latin's quantitative measure or some shit, I dunno.

I would say it is more particular to our time, the result of mass education and the expectations that you go get a BA after high school to reach or maintain middle-class status. Even tho the university is flooded with more and more who don't really engage intellectually, thereby lowering the proportion who truly belong there, it's still a good thing just because there are late bloomers or those who just need someone to open their eyes (that was me; I was a classic underachiever in high school), so eliminating people based on high school performance or income level doesn't make sense. Better too many than excluding those who would benefit from the opportunity. But, yeah, it does mean that you're always going to be playing to an audience that is mostly indifferent or hostile. Which is also why, holy fuck, do you treasure those students who are engaged. That's something I never realized, let alone appreciated, until I ended up on the other side of the podium.