Friday, February 3, 2017

Are tweets literature?

Last year, Bob Dylan won the Nobel Prize in literature and Donald Trump tweeted his way to become leader-elect of the free world. While these events have little to nothing in common, they both make me ponder the future of literature. In the past century, when I attended college at Suffolk University in Boston, we studied Lincoln’s Gettysburg address in the entry level English literature class. Even as a newbie to this country, I could engage with those words, the subtleties, the passionate art of trying to unify a nation. Lincoln rocked! While I don’t personally object to the selection of Bob Dylan for the Nobel Prize, I know that it raised a few eyebrows around the world. I’m fairly certain that Trump’s tweets are raising more eyebrows – both because of the content and the grammar. So, what are we to do?
As teachers and faculty members we are obligated to keep up with the latest trends in our respective subject areas. This means that professors in Political Science, English, and even Philosophy and History, will need to consider how to handle the White House’s latest mode of communication. But writing and communication cuts across disciplines. When you can become president of the US and put your name by sentences like “Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. Only ‘stupid’ people, or fools, would think that it is bad!” what are we to do with general writing instruction? Is it really necessary to clarify that a good thing is not a bad thing and that stupid people equal fools, especially when you only have 140 characters to get your point across? I would try to use some of those characters to back up my arguments. But research, scientific facts and good arguments seem to be a thing of the past.
140 characters do limit you, and it may make sense to try to simplify your language, use the shortest words possible (e.g. sad), and leave out obvious arguments, but why all the quotation marks? I am not a writing teacher and my first language isn’t English, but even I know that quotation marks are supposed to be used when you quote somebody else, or possibly to indicate that you question or blatantly discredit the word in quotation marks. As in, “according to the administration’s ‘alternative facts’ more people attended the current president’s inauguration than any other inauguration”.  For more about the US president’s use of quotation marks you may want to explore Trump’s ‘Use’ of ‘Quotation Marks’ an article found in the February 1, 2017 edition of the Chronical of Higher education by Ben Yagoda: http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/linguafranca/2017/02/01/trumps-use-of-quotation-marks/?cid=trend_right_a

Where does all of this leave college writing instruction? I’m curious to find out if students are using Trump language as arguments in their own writing – and if they do, do you accept it? How are you navigating this ‘brave’ new world? 

6 comments:

  1. I do not think it matters much what the medium is. I consider Twitter to be just a medium. Further, if you make a distinction between formal and informal writing and between language, truth and logic, tweets (in and of themselves) should not be a problem.

    Presidents are authority figures just because they are in positions of (political) power; but not, by virtue of that, authorities in any academic discipline. The White House’s latest mode of communication may be a trend; but it is not (necessarily) part of the latest trends in our respective (academic) subject areas.

    If you make a distinction between sentences, statements and arguments, as I do, you are not very much bothered by sentences like “Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. Only ‘stupid’ people, or fools, would think that it is bad!” What worries me is the irrelevant conclusion or attack on a strawman they suggest. The quote in question is Trump's response to allegations about Russian hacking and interference in American elections. From that point of view, it is a good example of a fallacy and the lack of critical thinking that one can use in class. "Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing;" but that does not mean Russian hacking (of) or interference in American elections is not a bad thing or is a good thing!

    Safro Kwame

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kwame, thanks for your comment! I agree that the medium does not matter as much as the content, and while I also agree that presidents are not usually authorities in any academic discipline, I would like to think that as our leader, the president has a responsibility to lead by example. Some of Mr Trump's tweets are clear attacks on individuals or groups of people. These types of comments are considered cyber bullying if they were put out by teenagers and could potentially get students expelled from school.

      I also wonder if tweets have sped up the evolution of language a couple of notches. No judgement - I just feel the need to explore the consequences in our classrooms.

      Delete
  2. Anna and colleagues:

    I've been enjoying reading Teaching Matters every weekend: it is much more fun to read and learn rather than to write and hope! This week the topic was so interesting that I felt the need to put on my "Make America Smart Again" baseball cap and give the issue some thought.

    I'm not sure that having students tweet their essays is a step I would ever take, but I can indeed see asking them to use the kind of thought that goes into expressing ideas in 140 characters to make their essays better. One way would be to start out with a tweet assignment: "Tell me what your essay is going to say in no more than 140 characters." This might help students narrow their focus and decide what they actually want to say--a more "with it" way to say "tell me your thesis." Teachers could use a similar assignment in the revising stage of the writing process: "Now that you've written your first draft, tweet me the takeaway." Tweets can even be used to liven up peer review, with everyone in the review group reading the essay and then summarizing their response in a tweet and comparing the results. Did everyone get the same point? If so, great; if not, what threw people off track? (I make no claim to originality here; if you check the literature on teaching composition you'll find lots of similar ideas.)

    But what I would remind students--and our president--is that the 140 characters simply form the premise. I might understand their main idea from reading their tweet but until they flesh it out with logic and proof and the kind of critical thinking Kwame calls for in his comment above, I can't judge its merits.

    To me the most interesting aspect of this whole issue from a teaching point of view--from mass comm, psychology, history, poly sci, philosophy, sociology, etc.--is why Trump's ungrammatical tweets seem to have more power than Obama's lovely rhetoric or Hillary's detailed position papers ever did. --Linda

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Linda! I'm honored that you have come back to visit. I agree that tweets can be incorporated creatively into assignments. The ability to distill your thoughts into a very brief statement is an art that is not easily mastered. While I have never used twitter in my classroom, my teenagers had an English assignment in ninth grade that required them to explore a famous literary character through tweets and creative hashtags. One of my daughters did Dante's Inferno. A captivating read indeed!
      When I asked one of my other daughters about twitter assignment she just said: "Don't even think about it - way to cringe-worthy!" For now, I'll use that as an excuse to leave tweets out of my teaching.
      As for the power of tweets over lovely rhetoric and position papers, it may simply, and unfortunately, be an accessibility issue. Maybe Hillary (and/or the DNC) would have benefitted from the type of assignment you describe.

      Delete
  3. What frightens me are the lies or, rather, falsehoods. What is more frightening, however, is the applause for the falsehoods without fact-checking or critical thinking. Here is a case in point:

    Trump Claims Media Don't Cover Terrorist Attacks; Archives Say Otherwise, NBC News, February 6, 2017

    Trump Says Journalists 'Have Their Reasons' to Play Down Terror Threat, New York Times - February 6, 2017

    In President Trump's first speech to the U.S. Central Command, he committed to expanding resources for the military and accused the news media of failing to report on terrorist attacks.

    The audience applauded! Most people who have lived in the "Third World" or under a dictatorship recognize this! If there were ever a special time for critical thinking, it is now! The truth is that there is never a bad time for critical thinking; just, apparently, an urgency now. Unfortunately, if Bertrand Russell is right, most people would rather die than think; and, he is said to have added, they usually do!

    Safro Kwame

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CORRECTION: "If there were ever a special time for critical thinking, it is now!" should have been "If there were ever a good time for critical thinking, it would be now!" Sorry about that.

      Safro Kwame

      Delete