Tempest in Takaki

Hi all,

In looking at the posts for this discussion I want to nudge you all to consider what Takaki really means about a “multicultural” look at The Tempest.

Does he mean simply understanding it from the perspective of an Englishman viewing the play? Or is he trying something more complex? If you read closely, how many different perspectives is he putting on display? One? Two? Three?

If that seems like a challenging question, stop for a moment and think about the different characters in the play. We find it easy to understand the play through Prospero’s eyes, right? He is, after all, the dominant character in the play. But what would that same play look like if we were to try to step into Caliban’s head and see it through his eyes? Or what about Miranda? Would her view be different from the others? What might that look like?

While they are all in the same play, each of those characters would experience it differently and understand it differently. his, then, is how we start to wrap out mind around the idea of multiple perspectives. I hope that makes sense.

Tim

A few thoughts on Discussion 2.2

Hi all,

I just finished grading Discussion 2.2 and I have some comments and thoughts to pass along to help us stay on tack and, hopefully, to guide you all to improving your understanding of the material and your grades in this class.

• Be sure to connect your comments directly to the readings—show me that you have done the reading and understand it by making this connections explicit. I’ve noticed that we have a lot of great stories being shared about people’s experiences, but we need to make sure the relevance of those stories to the assigned material is made clear.
• Remember, too, that I’m looking for evidence in your posts that you are doing the reading. Consequently, it’s not enough to mention one tiny part of a reading and respond to that. I gently deducted a few points when I saw this happening as a reminder to improve in the future.  (For example, very few people commented on the articles about Bush’s use of nicknames I wonder how many of you actually read those articles?)
• There seems to be some confusion of terms. “People of color” is generally an OK term when used in broadly talking about non-white people (blacks, latinos, Asians, Pacific Islanders, etc.); “colored people” is not. "Colored people” carries a lot of historical baggage leftover from legal segregation and Jim Crow laws. Of course, if you are only taking about blacks, or Native Americans, or latinos, then using those labels is also appropriate. 
• I noticed that a few people were uncomfortable being labeled “white.” That’s not unusual and we’re going to explore why very soon. In the meantime, if you felt uneasy over being identified as white, bookmark your comment and/or make a note in your notebook about it. 
• Finally, do remember that noticing race (which is almost always attached to skin color) and talking about is not a racist act. Indeed, the only way we can learn what it is and how it works is to talk about it. And to do that effectively we need a solid vocabulary.

Thanks!        

Tim

Watch this Space

Hi All,

Welcome to your instructor's blog. I'll be using this to alert you to important stuff, provide some broad comments about the things we're are talking about in class and offer a few reminders. You will find it helpful  (maybe even essential) to check this blog each time you log in to our course—and be sure you scroll down. I may not add a post for a day or two but then, on some days, I may make several entries—so check.

Also, because I am creating this outside of Canvas, you won't receive automatic notices of updates here unless you sign up to receive notices by email. To do that just enter your email in the box at the right.

This blog is a good way for me to talk to all of you, make announcements, and point things out. You can imagine it like this: This is where you are sitting in class waiting for things to begin and I, your instructor, rush in (I'm later than I want to be—again), coffee in hand, toss my stuff down on the podium, and, as you and I both get ready for the main show, engage in a little chit chat about the course and things going on in the world. I may even make a few lame jokes and provoke a few courtesy smiles....

Tim

Tech investor admits sexually harassing female entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley | Technology | The Guardian

A prominent venture capitalist admitted to sexually harassing women in the tech industry, saying he leveraged his “position of power in exchange for sexual gain” in the latest discrimination and misconduct scandal to rock Silicon Valley. 



 Justin Caldbeck announced on Friday that he would be taking an indefinite leave of absence from Binary Capital, the firm he co-founded, following the claims of six women who accused the 40-year-old of making unwanted advances, often in the context of potential business deals.