You probably won’t read past this sentence if said sentence does not amuse you.
Maybe that’s too presumptuous, but it’s a thought I had while reading about Dickens World, one of the more surprising attempts at making education entertaining I’ve seen in a while. The place is just what it sounds like – a theme park based on the life and stories of Charles Dickens. While there is nothing wrong with making literature more interesting, a full theme park is too much.
If this all seems trivial, consider this. First, if Dickens cannot stand on his own, then there’s no reason for him to stand at all. When a piece of literature becomes so dull and irrelevant that it requires a theme park to maintain interest, then the theme park is too late. The work does not matter anymore. While the general public is far from discerning in its tastes (the fact that The DaVinci Code sold any copies at all is proof enough of this) Dickens appears to have done well on his own without such gimmicks, both in popular and academic circles, and such an attraction only cheapens his work to just another object to amuse us, like a monkey with a squeeze box.
Second, on a larger scale, I see this as another symptom of the scourge of entertainment value. If something is not entertaining, it does not register in the popular mind. How many news sources reported on Paris Hilton going to jail? Why does anyone oustide the Hilton family even care? I think this attitude is well summed up in this post from the Literature Compass Blog:
Yet the museum comes across confidently, its intention of ‘art for entertainment’s sake’ appearing in a quote from Hard Times that encircles the four walls of the entrance: “People must be amused, squire, somehow. They can’t be always a-working, nor yet they can’t be always a-learning.”
Dickens World has clearly been planned with the emphasis on amusement combined with a smattering of learning.
Art does not need to be entertaining. As with any form of communication, it sometimes is far from amusing. By emphasizing “amusement” with just a “smattering of learning,” one teaches that the former is the more important of the two.…
Recommending a blog to someone is, for me, an easy question, because I only read two.
The first is VerseLogic, written by codepoetica (otherwise known as Alan Castonguay). The subjects he writes about are diverse, ranging from sharing a favorite poem to thoughts on new technological developments. Ironically enough, several posts happen to relate to new media – it was through VerseLogic that I first saw the “Machine is Us/ing Us” video, for instance.
The second is lainspotting, written by Lawmune (or Lawrence Eng). This blog was originally tied with his fansite for serial experiments lain (link to his site here), but has since branched off to discuss more general topics, though it still mostly centers around the study of online culture. Unfortunately, this one has not been updated in a long time now.
I feel like my recommendations are a bit lacking, since one is starting to look defunct, but these are the only two I’ve ever followed, except for maybe one other that isn’t even online anymore, and I’m very reluctant to try to recommend a blog that I’ve been reading for one day.…
Despite having written in a few different online settings, including adding comments to a handful of blogs, I must honestly say that I do not see much of a difference between writing for a blog versus writing for anything else. Certainly a powerful piece of prose or verse is powerful in any format, and it seems to me that as long as blogs are essentially text-based they will remain that way. Admittedly, they don’t have to remain text-based, since there’s nothing preventing someone from blogging via a comic or video. YouTube, in fact, already has a number of vlogs. That said, it’s not as though nobody’s ever made a video before, and though I can see where this can open up a number of doors for something creative, I remain unconvinced that blogging is as much of a revolution as many seem to believe.
The primary difference between blogs and other forms of communication is, of course, its availability and ease of use. As has been stated numerous times in numerous places, any ol’ fool with internet access can set one up, and they’re easy to maintain. In fact, browsing around WordPress I was slightly surprised to find just how easy it was. There are hardly any more steps to posting a blog entry than writing an entry into a journal – just a couple buttons to click, plus maybe a few tags for special formatting. After that, of course, is the opportunity for readers to add their own publicly viewable comments right there in the blog – or, depending on the format, in a link at the end of an entry. That also assumes that a blog has readers, which is far from guaranteed considering that there are about as many blogs on the internet as there are leaves in a jungle, and getting noticed nearly requires a miracle.
On a final note, one difference noted by Meg Hourihan is that “The weblog’s post unit liberates the writer from word count.” I need to ask my Arts & Technology professor if this applies to those of us blogging as a class assignment.…