[This blog is amid a series of postings that
aims to share with the reader a history of the nation – albeit highly summary
in nature – from the perspective of a dialectic struggle. That is the struggle between a cultural
perspective that emphasizes more communal and cooperative ideals of federalism
and the individualistic perspective of the natural rights construct.
The general argument this blog has made is that
federalism enjoyed the dominant cultural position in the US until World War II,
and after a short transition, the natural rights view has been dominant. Whether one perspective is dominant or the
other; whichever it is, that fact has a profound impact on the teaching of
civics in American classrooms.]
In the narrative this blog is sharing – that of
how federalist values and beliefs have played out in the American experience –
it was in the post World War II years when federalism lost its dominance in
American political culture. That
dominance was replaced by the natural rights view. This blog has made extensive comment on the
significance of that “turn.” It has also
alluded to the judgement that that turn’s effects have only increased in the
ensuing years, although the strength of the natural rights view has ebbed and
flowed as cultural elements tend to do.
Central
to the natural rights view is an intense sense of individualism. This blogger has noticed that of late,
various TV pundits have referred to this excessive individualism as just a
matter of fact eliciting no controversy – it is just an accepted factual
claim. But that state has its
developmental history in the years since the late 1940s. If one investigates those developments, one
finds numerous trends assisting this overall makeover.
To
this view of individualism, an invention would greatly cement and further the
influences that were moving the popular culture away from the concerns of
community with its levels of cooperation and collaboration. Along with the influences this blog outlined
in recent postings about a national economy and political/social individualism,
the nation was profoundly affected by television.
The
late Neil Postman[1] provides
a timely account of the effects of television in his 1986 book, Amusing
Ourselves to Death. He addresses the
way in which TV by the1980s was able to take hold of the popular mindset by
having various influences on the American political scene. From his book, he offers:
Our
conversation about nature and about ourselves [is] conducted in whatever
“languages” we find it possible and convenient to employ. We do not see nature as “it” is but only as
our languages are. And our languages are
our media. Our media are our metaphors. Our metaphors create the control of our
culture.[2]
In short, the metaphor – in this case TV –
dictates how a people view reality and define their expectations of not only
that reality but also of that culture.
Postman
writes about the effects of television:
“I believe the epistemology created by television not only is inferior
to a print-based epistemology but is dangerous and absurdist.”[3] Written exposition, which was the major
method of communication coming into the mid-20th century, demands
analysis and inferential thinking skills.
In addition, the written media demands a culture which promotes a
reflective and useful presentation of information in its discourse of reality.
In
that vein, he relates how America was different in the nineteenth century,
despite the transcendental and then pragmatic biases. In point of fact, America was, prior to TV, a
book and pamphlet reading nation.
Postman describes,
Public
business was channeled into and expressed through print, which became the
model, the metaphor and the measure of all discourse. The resonance [defined as the power of
influencing thought and action] of the lineal, analytical structure of print,
and in particular, of expository prose, could be felt everywhere.[4]
The television culture, on the other hand, is
bombarded by a constant stream of useless, disconnected information.
This
“peek-a-boo” form of discourse is ubiquitous with “only one pervasive voice –
the voice of entertainment.”[5] Image media of television demands passivity
as the viewer is presented a discontinuous, trivial reality. While Postman gives many examples of the
pervasiveness of this entertainment outlook, the example most relevant here is
in his chapter entitled, “Teaching as an Amusing Activity.”
As
elsewhere, the character of the media determines the character of the
activity. In terms of schooling, the
activity is formulating the curriculum.
What is most frightening about Postman’s argument is that the cited
dangers seem to be accepted as innovative education. He argues that educational television follows
TV’s commandment: no prerequisites, no
perplexity, and avoidance of exposition.
This renders it impossible for any affected curriculum to look at any
issue responsibly.
To
the argument that holds that TV allows educators the ability to present studied
materials dramatically, he cites research that questions the notion that
learning takes place when material is presented in dramatic style. He sums up the effects of curriculum based on
TV as follows:
And
in the end, what will the students have learned? They will … have learned something about [the
subject matter]. Mainly, they will have
learned that learning is a form of entertainment or, more precisely, that
anything worth learning can take the form of an entertainment, and ought to.[6]
In conclusion, on the effects of TV, not only
does the nation suffer from a self-indulgent population, but one that lacks the
ability to reflect effectively.
Television has helped inflict the nation with a perceptional perspective
that tends to thwart the ability to assess the short sightedness of the current,
prevailing individualism. Instead, TV
caters to the consumerism and the self-indulgence by presenting a standard by
which too many Americans judge reality.
And
that basis of judgement leads one to consider the role social media plays today
and is the topic of the next posting. Of
course, since Postman’s book was published, changes have beset TV. There has been the explosion of cable TV and
now there is streaming. While some of
these changes tweak the claims one finds above – e.g., cable has provided more thought-provoking
programming – the main points Postman makes are judged by this blogger to be
still valid.
In
sum, that effect that TV has rendered and the other developments this blog’s
narrative has described, has been a history of a steady drift away from the
federalist, communitarian origins of the nation. In its stead has been a growing
centralization of political and economic power.
In addition, a dysfunctional individualism has grown in the local vacuum
created by the centralization of power (more on this to come). And with that, the nation is primed for the
effects of those handheld devices – the cell phones with their links to online social
media.
No comments:
Post a Comment