Reflections

Like the various other blogs I've attempted to maintain, this one has suffered the same neglected fate. 

I recognize that technology is becoming an increasingly  large part of our everyday lives, and I'm doing my best to accommodate its pervasiveness; however, I am an analog girl through and through. 

I don't know why, but my brain just doesn't seem to process all this tech stuff very well.  For example, I can skim online articles, but if I want to have a truly engaging experience with a text, I have to print it out.  Perhaps I'm a kinesthetic learner?  I find that holding the pages in my hands helps me remember information because I can situate it spatially within the text itself.  Also, annotating texts is another mnemonic tool as the physical act of writing notes improves my information retention.

Like I said, I am trying to adapt, especially since technology will play a large role in my classroom, and I will be interacting daily with my tech-savvy students.

While the tech aspect of this class proved to be challenging, I greatly enjoyed other aspects of class such as the group presentations.  Typically, I prefer to work on my own; however, I really enjoyed the projects in this class because the members of my group were wonderful to work with.  Each contributed meaningful insights, and provided a unique perspective on the subjects.  Most importantly, we worked together very well, and I greatly enjoyed getting to know each member better. 

Class discussions were usually very lively, and I appreciated everybody's willingness to contribute.  I learned much from each person's unique perspective.  My fellow students' group presentations made an impact upon me, as well, particularly the one concerning video games.  That presentation not only introduced me to the foreign world of video games, but it also made me think about including video games into my understanding of literacy.

I appreciate that this class made me analyze my approach to the classroom.  It really re-organized my perceptions of what the classroom can be because it modeled an interactive discussion-based style of teaching in addition to forcing me to engage with technology and the variety of literacies made possible by technology in the classroom.

The Financialized Paradigm in Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Babel

Amber Levitch

Engl 495esm

Wexler

Dec. 13, 2012

The Financialized Paradigm in Alejandro González Iñárritu’s Babel

            Facilitating interpersonal and cultural connections is one of the many benefits arising from technological advancements.  Due to the, at times, instantaneous nature of communications, modern society is becoming increasingly globalized.  In other words, technology’s facilitation of communication enables the exchange of ideas and cultures on a global scale, essentially creating a world without borders.  Although globalization promotes the seemingly positive effect of an increased connectedness between international communities, it also promotes a financialized paradigm, the effects of which are examined in the film Babel by Alejandro González Iñárritu.

            This assertion may not be overtly implied in the film, but it does become more apparent when viewed through the lenses of Fredric Jameson’s essay “The Politics of Utopia” and Randy Martin’s essay “Where Did the Future Go?”  Jameson asserts that globalization is characterized by “two distinct worlds,” one of which consists of “misery, poverty, unemployment, starvation, squalor, violence, and death” while the other possesses “unparalleled wealth, computerized production, scientific and medical discoveries unimaginable a century ago as well as an endless variety of commercial and cultural pleasures” (35).  In other words, Jameson believes that the modern globalized world can be divided into two clearly delineated types: the First World and the Third World.  Martin advances Jameson’s assertion by articulating the nature of the relationship between the First World and the Third World in terms of finance and risk management, specifically the “financialization of daily life” in which “society’s central cleavage would be played out along the lines of risk” (2).  For those who can manage the risk, they would be “managers if not masters of their own lives,” whereas those who cannot would be “cast as populations ‘at-risk,’” and in need of management (2).

            Martin also asserts that the financialized paradigm affects not only the social sphere, but the domestic one, as well.  He writes, “In practice, this financialization of daily life did not banish labor, but elaborated it in the domestic sphere” (2).  Now, the home becomes the “root of economy” where an everyday citizen of the First World can exercise his/her financial influence by engaging with the wider financial culture by taking out a home mortgage or inventing in a retirement fund.  Iñárritu explores the financialized paradigm as it operates within the domestic sphere through the relationship between Richard Jones, played by Brad Pitt, and his nanny, Amelia, played by Adriana Barraza.  As a member of the First World, Richard is not only a “manager” of his own life, but he is also a manager in Amelia’s life.  Amelia is a Mexican citizen who has been living and working in the US illegally for many years.  Richard hired her to provide nanny services for his two children, Debbie and Mike, which she has lovingly done since they were infants.  As a result, this position is more than just a job for her; in fact, she feels more like a surrogate mother than a nanny, as she indicated during the scene in which she gets deported after a border crossing with the children goes awry: “I raise these kids since they were born.  I take care of them day and night.  I feed them breakfast and lunch and dinner.  I play with them.  Mike and Debbie are like my own childrens” (Iñárritu).  To which the INS agent replies, “But they are not your children” (Iñárritu).  This is also the view possessed by Richard, who does not consider Amelia to be a surrogate mother to his children because he engages in an employer/employee relationship with her in which she provides her nanny services in exchange for pay.  In other words their relationship revolves around a financial transaction that occurs within the domestic sphere.  As a result, Richard acts as her manager, deciding when she must work, as indicated during the scene in which he tells her that nobody is available to relieve her for the day so she can attend her son’s wedding in Mexico: “Cancel your son’s wedding.  I’ll pay for another one – a better one.  I need you to do this, Amelia … We’re really counting on you, Amelia.  I’m sorry, but you have to do this” (Iñárritu).  Not only does Richard indicate that Amelia must continue to work, but he essentially offers her money, in the form of a “better” wedding for her son, to do so.  Unfortunately, this offer is not satisfactory for Amelia, and she decides to bring the children with her to her son’s wedding, which is a decision that leads to the disastrous border crossing that endangers their lives and ultimately gets her deported.  However, this arrangement is satisfactory for Richard because of his existing financial relationship to Amelia, thus he believes than the offer of a bonus will entice her to miss her son’s wedding in order to continue working.

            Richard also engages in an employer/employee relationship with Anwar, the Moroccan tour guide, played by Mohamed Akhzam.  Essentially, Richard hires Anwar to guide him and his wife, Susan, played by Cate Blanchett, around the country of Morocco by bus.  The trip takes an uncharted turn when Susan is mysteriously shot.  Fearing continued attacks and concerned about his wife’s welfare, Richard agrees to travel to Anwar’s village in order to wait for an ambulance to arrive.  Anwar brings Richard to his home, providing as comfortable a place as possible for her, and assists in her care.  He secures a doctor, albeit a veterinarian, to provide first aid to Susan’s injuries in addition to acting as a translator with Moroccan officials.  Unfortunately, due to political reasons, Susan’s ambulance is delayed; however, the wait enables Richard and Anwar to get to know each other better.  They discover that despite their cultural differences, they build a bond over their families as each is a husband and father.  When the helicopter finally arrives, Richard struggles to find a way to show his gratitude to Anwar for his help, and attempts to give Anwar money in exchange for the services he provided.  In the scene, Richard and Anwar embrace, then Richard reaches indiscriminately into his wallet grabbing a handful of bills, and offers them to Anwar, which Anwar refuses even when Richard insists.  This final exchange is another indication of Richard’s financialized paradigm as his response to Anwar’s kindness is to offer money, as though Anwar was providing excellent customer service by helping to save Susan’s life.  This moment is an extension of their employer/employee relationship, which Anwar breaks when he refuses the money.  By doing so Anwar prevents the financialized paradigm from invading his domestic sphere, and indicates that he has established an equal relationship with Richard, one in which a fellow man, husband, and father helps his fellow man in need, not for financial gain, but because it is the right thing to do.

            Although Anwar is able to prevent the financialized paradigm from entering his domestic sphere, he sadly is unable to prevent its pervasiveness in the political sphere.  Due to concerns regarding terrorism, the American and Moroccan political relationship interferes with Susan’s care, as they prevent the dispatch of the ambulance while the governments sort out the cause of the attacks.  Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, America has engaged in a war on terror in order to ferret out terrorists before they have the chance to strike again.  Martin addresses this attitude in his essay, arguing that it is also a result of America’s financialized paradigm, “The twin wars [in Afghanistan and Iraq] prosecuted in the wake of the fallen towers took on the logics of finance in their own organization as well as their material efficacy” (4).

In other words, [T]he terrorist is the object of bad risk embrace, one who places all good risk abiders at risk” (Martin 3).  In order to contain the risk, America must pre-emptively strike against those who provide a threat, engaging in an “antagonism presented as unbounded in time or space” (3).  As a result, the American government utilizes the threat of terrorism to establish an imperialistic “renaissance” (1) in which they justify the invasion of other countries as extinguishing the “bad risk embrace” of terrorist threats.

            Whether it occurs in the domestic sphere or the political one, the financialized paradigm informs today’s globalized relationships, as explored in the film Babel by Alejandro González Iñárritu.  In the domestic sphere, everyday citizens of the First World engage in a broad financial culture.  Some, like Richard Jones, may even foster business relationships within the home by employing domestic care workers.  In such cases the domestic sphere mirrors the financial machinations of the social/business sphere.  Additionally, the financialized paradigm informs America’s war on terror, and establishes a new age of American imperialism.   

 Works Cited

Babel. By Guillermo Arriaga. Perf. Brad Pitt. 01 Distribution, 2007. DVD.

Jameson, Frederick. "The Politics of Utopia." New Left Review. N.p., 2004. Web.

Martin, Randy. "Where Did the Future Go?" Logosonline. Logos 5.1, 2006. Web.

Globalization in Babel: Rough Draft

Amber Levitch

Engl 495esm

Wexler

Dec. 6, 2012

Working Title

            Facilitating such connections is one of the many benefits arising from technological advancements.  Due to the, at times, instantaneous nature of communications, modern society is becoming increasingly globalized.  In other words, technology’s facilitation of communication enables the exchange of ideas and cultures on a global scale, essentially creating a world without borders.  Although globalization promotes the seemingly positive effect of an increased connectedness between international communities, it also promotes a polarized global economy in which wealth is disproportionately distributed, the effects of which are examined in the film Babel by Alejandro González Iñárritu.

            This assertion may not be overtly implied in the film, but it does become more apparent when viewed through the lenses of Fredric Jameson’s essay “The Politics of Utopia” and Randy Martin’s essay “Where Did the Future Go?”  Jameson asserts that globalization is characterized by “two distinct worlds,” one of which consists of “misery, poverty, unemployment, starvation, squalor, violence, and death” while the other possesses “unparalleled wealth, computerized production, scientific and medical discoveries unimaginable a century ago as well as an endless variety of commercial and cultural pleasures” (35).  In other words, Jameson believes that the modern globalized world can be divided into two clearly delineated types: the First World and the Third World.  Martin advances Jameson’s assertion by articulating the nature of the relationship between the First World and the Third World in terms of finance and risk management, specifically the “financialization of daily life” in which “society’s central cleavage would be played out along the lines of risk” (2).  For those who can manage the risk, they would be “managers if not masters of their own lives,” whereas those who cannot would be “cast as populations ‘at-risk,’” and in need of management (2).

            Martin also asserts that the financialized paradigm affects not only the social sphere, but the domestic one, as well.  He writes, “In practice, this financialization of daily life did not banish labor, but elaborated it in the domestic sphere” (2).  Now, the home becomes the “root of economy” where an everyday citizen of the First World can exercise his/her financial influence by engaging with the wider financial culture by taking out a home mortgage or inventing in a retirement fund.  Iñárritu explores the financialized paradigm as it operates within the domestic sphere through the relationship between Richard Jones, played by Brad Pitt, and his nanny, Amelia, played by Adriana Barraza.  As a member of the First World, Jones is not only a “manager” of his own life, but he is also a manager in Amelia’s life. 

Creative Writing Unit

Objective:  to utilize an internet application to create a unique superhero character, use blog to showcase characters, incorporate the character into a collaborative story with fellow students, use Microsoft PowerPoint to bring story to life.

·            Introduce students to literature of comic books, focusing on the superhero genres

·            Explore typical archetypes presented in comics

·            Superhero

·            Sidekick

·            Villain

·            Henchmen

·            Alteregos

·            Femme Fatales

·            Love Interest

·            Mentors

·            Explore plots presented in comics

·            Focus on Good vs. Evil binary

·            Introduce concepts of “Hero’s Journey”

·            Utilize Marvel’s “Create Your Own Superhero” application to create unique heroes

·            Students upload image to blog

·            Students develop hero’s character, listing characteristics and providing background

·            Students create groups of 4 in which they create their own comic story

·            Students consult each other’s blogs in order to gain an understanding of their characters, and the ways in which they will interact with each other

·            Students outline plot structure

·            Students fill in details of plot, including dialogue

·               Explore proper use of quotations in dialogue creation

·            Students post stories to blog to share with fellow classmates

·            Students create PowerPoint presentation to bring story to life for class