Refunctioning or Reinventing

Before yesterday I did not have a clear idea of what a zine was. Thanks to Michelle and her ever-so-helpful list of links to websites about zines and e-zines, I am starting to see what we're going to be working with in the coming weeks.

Looking at all of these zines I started thinking something that I often think about the Internet: where do these people find the time? I am always surprised that there are so many people who work so diligently to create websites, blogs, and, now that I know, zines. The opportunity to express a specific point of view, without censorship (I hope), without (great) cost and without any constraints in terms of format is obviously very appealing. The zines I looked at seem like obvious examples of refunctioning a pop culture product (magazines, of course) to produce something with a real message from a human being, instead of an over-produced, profit-driven, piece of junk food for the world to consume.

I think the same could be said for many websites and blogs, like this one. In fact, this is a perfect example, because there might be nothing on this blog that interests anyone other than me, but that should not matter. The beauty (and the problem) with these forms of communication is the lack of "regulation" that takes place in forums like television. As Mimi White points out, the narratives on television may become fragmented and seemingly diverse in order to appeal to a broad audience, but the format and general message contains obvious regulation (hegemony). There is no way that you would ever see a television show about the Women's Studies 320 discussion, because it is far too specific to draw the ratings needed to make a profit, but this discussion is published here on the web for anyone to read. We have taken the webpage and refunctioned it for our own purpose. I want to get started experimenting with the refunctioning of magazines for this next assignment. Now I just have to come up with something worth telling the world...

Better late than never

I was forced to take a brief hiatus from all things academic over the past week, so this blog is late, and I know it won't be eligible for a mark, but I wanted to say something anyway.

As a history major, and someone passionately interested in the past, Baudrillard was a particularly poignant read for me. I think I can personally relate to the feeling that there cannot be one truth about anything in the world around us, and I think anyone who studies history in depth discovers quickly that this uncertainty is everywhere in the history books. Historians disagree on, discuss, redefine and reevaluate their perspectives on historical events all the time. For me, this is one of the best things about studying history. Once you get past the frustration of having to memorize "facts" and dates that may or may not be the important ones, I think the subjectivity of history opens up a whole new world. It means that there are millions of ways to see the "progress" (or decline, depending on your perspective) of humanity. Each conflicting historical lesson I learn, whether it's in a class, from a book, or even through a movie, I find myself more able to open my mind to other perspectives in my day to day life. History is an opportunity to explore human behaviour and our own lives, as a result.

I think the idea that history is disappearing is interesting because I think there will always be ways to look at the past, regardless how complex or manipulated the records may be. There will be people who study old CNN broadcasts, emails and blogs, and all the other bizarre documents we are currently leaving behind. It's all evidence of who we are now, what we do, why we do it, how we do it. History, like the study of literature or art, is all about interpretation and you work with what you have.

Thanks for voting Conservative

This isn't my post for the week, but I had to say something about this. My husband caught the tail end of a news story on CBC Newsworld about a change in federal funding for women's interest groups and I'm outraged about two things. First of all, that it was difficult to actually find on a news site (try the CBC) and second that the truth is our government thinks it's more important to fund "faith-based" women's interest groups and REAL Women than anyone who is working for women's equality. I'll let you read the story for yourself, even though it's not "top headline" material, but no one should be surprised. We'll all be at home with our babies like good Christian women in no time. Like I said, thanks for voting Conservative Canada.