violence and the slippery slope

Three seemingly unrelated events occurred this past week:

1. While preparing my students for the written final exam for history of theatrical space/design, a student complained that courses (like mine) that require a fair amount of writing a) bring down his grade point average, and b) are a waste of time since they will not make him a better electrical engineer. After pointing out that a reason for "a" could be the assumption of "b," I explained the not-too-revolutionary concept that a functioning democracy requires good critical thinking skills on the part of its citizens.

2. 26 women and children were killed by a deeply troubled individual with a semi-automatic assault weapon.

3. The first public figure "brave" enough to defend the current federal laws on gun ownership after the massacre--Louie Gohmert, Republican, congressman from Texas--argued (via fallacy) that restrictions on assault rifles are wrong because "Once you start drawing the line, where do you stop?"
___________

If more U.S. citizens demanded sound reasoning from their leaders, perhaps life in the U.S. would be less absurdly violent.

Is Stephen Greenblatt a victim of his own method?

There has been a piling on effect in criticism of Stephen Greenblatt's 2011 love letter to the European Renaissance.  There is much head-scratching and outrage in this LA Review of Books: Swerve article and the blogasphere (In the Middle) about the awards that have been heaped upon a book full of historical inaccuracies, oversimplifications, and barely disguised anti-religious rhetoric--an argument based on antithesis, a sermon on the evils of medieval culture that will soothe its reader with a sense of historical certitude.

Therefore, I commit myself to piling on.  But I also want to raise a question that may not have been mentioned yet.  To put it blandly (and I'm not sure New Historicism deserves a subtler spin), if the works of individuals or intentional communities do not contribute to the construction of the archive, and the contours of culture are formed on the surface of insidious, unrecognized micrologies of power only, is it possible too that historical narratives can emerge from a Foucauldian morass without the benefit of intentional, self-aware scholarship? As a tenured professor at Harvard, Greenblatt has been afforded oodles of time to catch up on fifty years of medieval scholarship that has sunk the boat of the dark "Dark Ages."  How did he miss the sinking boat?  Maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt and suggest that as a diagnosed (but untreated) New Historicist, Greenblatt should not bother to consider counter-narratives, since, in the end, the currents of history and history-telling will inevitably push us where they will, despite our own best efforts.

simulation and imitation

A phrase that often slips (too easily) off my tongue during a class session is "in the real world" (i.e., "someplace other than this classroom").  The classroom is both simulation and imitation.  The hours of labor arbitrary, the intellectual groups randomly assembled.  A space for play, technology, and introspection.  If simulation means imitation without human (or thing) presence, the classroom can do that too.

The video is of a fictional World Cup match between St. Kitts and Mexico on FIFA soccer.  Vacillating between innovation and pure mimesis, this video game does a phenomenal job of recreating offensive strategies, defensive attacks, and multiple trajectories of the ball.  The Scottish accent of the announcer brings the viewer right to the edge of "the real world," arousing a sense of competitive excitement.

Which is more enjoyable to watch: the video simulation or a video recording of a match between humans?  Both offer their own set of pleasures.  But I suggest that the simulated version might work better in a jock classroom.  Unlike human players, these avatars never get tired and they ALWAYS know the right place on the field to occupy when they are without the ball.  Watch the Lilliputian players from Mexico from 2:45-3:10: stacking one beautiful passing triangle on another as they go up the field.  Barcelona's Ineista and Xavi might come close to this kind of brilliance, but they will never surpass it.  An archetype and prototype extracted from concrete moments of play.  How better to describe inductive reasoning and information coagulation in the classroom?