After having completed the readings, I must say that I was a bit overwhelmed with so much new information. New being the key word…but little by little some topics began to make sense where as some did not. I now understand what Professor Frelick was referring to about trying on new “lenses”.

The most difficult part for me was understanding the complexities and intricacies of the text itself.  I suppose one could say I experienced the “shock effect” Shklovsky talked about (even though he was referring to poetry). I did like the examples Shklovsky used from Tolstoy to explain defamiliarization. I have never read any of Tolstoy’s works but was very impressed by his descriptions and different ways of expressing himself within the excerpts (ie – the horses view on property). It’s interesting to see authors express ideas in different ways through the written word.

I also liked Foucault’s take on the role of language as mentioned by Rivkin and Ryan in Introduction: The Implied Order: Structuralism; “Foucault notices that what counts as knowledge changes with time, and with each change, the place of language in knowledge is also modified” (54).

I feel like this holds true to this day and for years to come. Just look at how much we have achieved in such little time. Before moving to Vancouver (as of three weeks ago), I was working in the Advancement department of an international private school that taught students starting from PK3- high school. It was astonishing to see how much children could pick up at such a young age. By the time they entered first grade, they knew the alphabet, they knew how to count, add, subtract, spell, and read in two (2) languages. I don’t know about you but when I was that young…all I did was learn the alphabet and color. What counts as knowledge has indeed changed over time or perhaps it is the act of science/research that has proven that human beings are capable of more than what we once were.  

Further into the readings, I was able to see and kind of understand the meaning of signified and signifier but unfortunately, I was a bit confused when it came to Barthes and the term myth. Is it that myth ties everything together…the common thread?

Hopefully one of you guys can clear that up for me. I am optimistic and hope my “lenses” won’t be as foggy in the readings to come.

After having completed the readings, I must say that I was a bit overwhelmed with so much new information. New being the key word…but little by little some topics began to make sense where as some did not. I now understand what Professor Frelick was referring to about trying on new “lenses”.

The most difficult part for me was understanding the complexities and intricacies of the text itself.  I suppose one could say I experienced the “shock effect” Shklovsky talked about (even though he was referring to poetry). I did like the examples Shklovsky used from Tolstoy to explain defamiliarization. I have never read any of Tolstoy’s works but was very impressed by his descriptions and different ways of expressing himself within the excerpts (ie – the horses view on property). It’s interesting to see authors express ideas in different ways through the written word.

I also liked Foucault’s take on the role of language as mentioned by Rivkin and Ryan in Introduction: The Implied Order: Structuralism; “Foucault notices that what counts as knowledge changes with time, and with each change, the place of language in knowledge is also modified” (54).

I feel like this holds true to this day and for years to come. Just look at how much we have achieved in such little time. Before moving to Vancouver (as of three weeks ago), I was working in the Advancement department of an international private school that taught students starting from PK3- high school. It was astonishing to see how much children could pick up at such a young age. By the time they entered first grade, they knew the alphabet, they knew how to count, add, subtract, spell, and read in two (2) languages. I don’t know about you but when I was that young…all I did was learn the alphabet and color. What counts as knowledge has indeed changed over time or perhaps it is the act of science/research that has proven that human beings are capable of more than what we once were.  

Further into the readings, I was able to see and kind of understand the meaning of signified and signifier but unfortunately, I was a bit confused when it came to Barthes and the term myth. Is it that myth ties everything together…the common thread?

Hopefully one of you guys can clear that up for me. I am optimistic and hope my “lenses” won’t be as foggy in the readings to come.