March 23, 2012
Atlanta Post
Hey class! I'm en route to Atlanta trying to do homework (Hoosiers!). Havin listened and looked at the website, I find myself wondering what the agency is of these women and their stories. I feel that inmates are separated into a genre of their own, but also one not respected that much. In the sense of respect, I mean that it's not a recognized genre in the way horror or drama is--it's a subcategory of the genre. These women have come forth and shared experiences, but what agency does that leave them? Their stories are available, but does that provide them agency or do they merely act as entertainment for readers? I think in order to have true agency, ones view has to be respected in the sense that its considered valuable. For many stories, some perspectives are read but not considered important. In giving these women a space to tell their stories, they are entitled with an agency previously not
Given to them. Is this genre though? As Miller states, a genre is classified by "comparable responses" so prior to this, I'm sure there were female prison accounts, but were they that common? With the creation of sites like this, I think it creates a genre for writers and, in addition, gives inmates an outlet to tell their stories. However, as Loywr states in his introduction, "Unabl to do justice for what is going on in them"--so how affective is this the ? While I want to think that there is agency given to the writers, if their words are unable to encapsulate the full story, is it affective?
I know that was a lot of rambling/ stream of consciousness...sorry. Go IU!
7 comments:
Very early on, you mention that the voice of "inside" and "outside" should count as one, but I think it's right to keep them separate. Both types of stories have a different overall perspective since they come fron diffract "backgrounds" so keeping them separate is necessary and important
This is something I also thought a lot about. What exactly is this website accomplishing? I feel like the majority of those who would even hear about this project already have some idea of the injustices experienced by prisoners. These stories need to reach the larger population, who aren't looking to hear these women's stories and maybe don't want to. I do think they do have some agency in this situation though because it's surely a step up from being completely ignored. One person knowing can lead to another, who shares it with others, who share it with more people... but I don't think this kind of story will gain traction like the infamous "Kony 2012" video. Why? Because we'd have to take a long, hard look in the mirror and acknowledge our mistakes as a society. It's easier just to simply ignore it, keep our heads down, and worry about our own lives. They're criminals anyway, so they deserve it, right? (Sarcasm of course, in case anyone didn't pick up on it.)
On the topic of a genre of women's prison accounts: I'm familiar with several studies which were done in the Victorian era on the subject of women and prostitution, interviewing women in prison. However, I'm not sure if their accounts were published or only the researcher's findings.
On the topic of "doing justice": Before a problem can be remedied, the nature of the problem has to be articulated. I felt like the project was respectful to the women and lent them an agency they almost certainly would not have been privilege to otherwise, but it's definitely open for interpretation.
@ Tessa, who posted at the same time as me: I would say that the reason this piece probably won't have the same effect as "Kony 2012" is because it doesn't make use of "The Rhetoric of Hitler's Battle" (that was Burke, right? like "Kony 2012" does. Not to derail the conversation, but now Hitler is what I think of every time I see something related to that campaign. They've created an enemy who is the embodiment of evil and attempted to band humanity together on a large scale to wipe out that enemy.
Now, what is that saying about the fate of a conversation after someone starts comparing someone else to Hitler and/or Nazis?
I actually just blogged about that, Tessa. And I agree, people don't care because they're criminals, which is sad, but I do understand their thought process. And I think the whole idea of agency here is really interesting, and I think what you're saying in this post is that the reader/viewer basically gives agency to these people, or it may have been suggested if not explicitly stated. But I would agree with that, I think the audience needs to go into this with some sort of willingness to be receptive in order for the speaker to exercise their agency.
The topic of agency is interesting. Daniel's essay definitely gives them more agency than they would normally have. At the same time they are the only ones with the agency to speak in the essay when normally the prison system is the only one with the agency to speak. I wonder what it would look like to give the prison and its inmates equal agency to speak at the same time. I think that would lead to some interesting dialogue.
@Sarah Whoa, I didn't even think to make that connection, but you're completely right. Sensationalism is a good way to get your cause recognized, which the Kony video does well. Having one specific enemy means the solution is easy-- take out that person. The problem with the prison system, of course, is more complicated. There is no common enemy. The injustice is perpetuated by many people, so it's harder for people to visualize the solution. And with that discouragement, they give up and choose to ignore it, since they're not sure what to do.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.