Discourse His Horse

Forewarning....I'm exhausted and have to go to bed early tonight (ideally by 10pm) because I have to be up and on the road to LA for work. And yes, that means I will not be present in class tomorrow, I'm sorry guys. But anyway, let's get to talking about discourse communities. Our boy Swales, I believe thats his name, gave us the breakdown of what a discourse really is...not like those fakers he referenced who think they know what they're talking about. Or should I say "thought" they knew what they were talking about. Anyone who care so deeply about this stuff is probably super old and....I'm gonna stop.

After putting some thought into it, I came up with a few groups that I think fit the mold of what "S" was talking about. Unfortunately, they were all pretty messed up groups, meaning they all did/ continue to cause harm to the public good, to say the least. The group I decided to talk about, seeing as I just finished binge watching a show on these guys, is the drug cartels.

Lets talk about the Columbian drug cartels, or should I say Narcos. Just like the groups "S" refers to, these guys fit all the qualifications of being a discourse community. All of the different cartels, prior to them being broken up, had a set of common goals with respect to one another. They were all making loads of cash off of the drug trade and they were all happy about it. Secondly, their lines of communication with one another were flawless. When trouble was on the horizon for one of the cartels, they would communicate with one another for assistance. These lines of communication were nearly untraceable, making them their own sort of genre. And lastly, the Narcos were very secretive and suspicious groups. No outsiders were allowed in and those who were granted access, had to meet very strict standards. Goodnight peeps.

I don't care what you think

Holy smokes!!! Why are all these people so angry when they write their article??? Do they really believe that by talking all this digital smack is gonna sway anyones opinion. No way!!! Even as I was reading the article posted on the conservative website Townhall.com, I was blown away with how negative the author was. Although I consider myself a "conservative" when it comes to politics, the article "Liberals Are The Sort Of People Who..." written by John Hawkins, blew me back. What is the gosh dang point of bad nothing people with different view points. Im sorry, bad mouthing doesn't quite cover it, bashing is a better word. I mean, what is he trying to prove here? The people who read these articles from this particular site clearly already are conservative thinkers, so whats the point? I did think some of it was funny, and yes I agreed with some of the thing Hawkins says, but I mean really, thats the best you have to offer our society???

Oh well...

Now we shall cross the bridge over to the left. In the article "Donald Trump's bet: We are all chumps" written by the Washington Post, a notorious left wing news company, we see the same harsh criticism on someone who's opinions don't exactly fall in line with their own. My question with these news outlets is why the hell do they even bother posting this stuff. I mean, I understand why they do it, to re enforce their political beliefs and cement their viewers ideas on whats going on in the political world today. But man, this is annoying. No offense to anyone who subscribes to these bias outlets, but come on people, we can do better than this.

That exactly why I have grown fond towards this JSTOR daily website. A better name for it would be "information outlet". Because thats exactly what it is! Just the facts, no opinions. Love it. The first article I read from them was "Where American Public Schools Came From". I really enjoyed this article because it is something I've always been curious about and is relevant in our lives today because it affects everyone. We all have a duty to pay our taxes which funds public schools in America. So in theory, I helped pay for your brothers, sister, moms, dads, sons, daughters and anyone else education. Frankly, I'm not so sure how I feel about that. Don't get me wrong, I am grateful for the fact I have received a sorta free education, but to be honest, I think it was a shitty education. Classroom sizes were large for me growing up, which inhibited me from getting a sufficient amount of personal time with the instructor, and for me thats very important to my success in a classroom. Because of my experiences in public school, one of my biggest goals in life is to send my kids to private school so they can get a better education. But even then, I will still be paying taxes that will go to Public Schools. I wonder then, if I am able to send my kids to private, if I will be ok paying taxes for public education.

But here's the point, the JSTOR article didn't tell whats right or wrong about American Public Schools, all it gave me was the facts like how it became a thing and how it grew into what it is today. You mean I get to make up my own mind/develop my own opinion??? No way!!! LOL. But anywhoot...thats the best example of an un-opinionated article I can find that is relevant to todays society and actually gives you something to consider.

I also, took a glance at the article on JSTOR "Stranger Things", only because I binge watched it an approximately 28 hours...I know, I'm the man. I fricken love the 80's theme and of coarse Mrs. Winona Ryder. She's amazing in it. The article did a good job laying out where the whole nose bleed/psychic  powers thing derived from. All good info.

Breaking Down Barriers

Well....I had no idea that one could feel so strong about something as simple as a "genre", but this world is filled with surprises. Amy Devit has a lot to say on the matter, but quite frankly, that was more than I could take. I will say this though, after reading Devit's article, I do have more respect (I think thats the right word) for the idea behind genre's.

When I hear the word genre, I think of old books and stories or black and white movies. I never understood why this was, I just simply accepted it. After reading Devit's article, it does make a bit more sense why I associate genre with old things. This is because each genre as we know it, is like a pillar. There is a non-fiction pillar, a fantasy pillar, one for horror, one for drama, the list goes on and on. These pillars are made up of individual works of literature or film that provide the cement, or marble, or clay, or whatever you want these pillars to be made of....even cheese if thats your sorta thing. I prefer parmesan. Not sure if anyone can tell, but I'm hungry.

Sorry for the sidetrack, but any time a new piece is written, recorded, filmed, or constructed in any other way, it is labeled by some critics or the creators themselves as a certain genre. Therefore, we are constantly maintaining what Devit calls "existing power structures and dynamics" and providing them with what they need for the continuation of these labels. Something about that bothers me. I think it's wrong for someone to determine what category your work can or cannot fall into. Why do we need labels anyway, all its done throughout history is kept us apart and segregated.

One last thing I'd like to comment on is music. I would to give music of the past 10 years a round of applause. This may be the only category of artistic creativity that has defied the rules and regulations for genres. In fact, in the past 10 years, we have established an entirely new kind of music that falls into no previously existing category...EDM, or electric dance music. Other than EDM, all you have to do is turn on the radio and you can hear all sorts of music that you would have trouble categorizing. You've got rappers spitting flows over guitars and drums, Justin Beibers voice over edm, you even have Kanye West singing beautiful hooks to songs while letting loose all his ignorance over the following verse... I LOVE IT