October 26, 2012

Change

      In Bakhtin's "Discourse in the Novel" he explained Heteroglossia to be "Another's speech in another's language, serving to express authorial intentions but in a refracted way" (Bakhtin, 324). In Sharon Daniel's project (could I call it an essay?) "Public Secrets" I believe she is using heteroglossia as a way to share her viewpoint through the voices of the prisoners. I'm not saying that told them what to say but she picked which questions to ask and we were only given part of the answers to questions that we don't know. If she had asked different questions would the answers we see now still be the same? It's hard to know.


  I found the medium that Daniel's used to be really interesting because it not only gave a way for her audience to interact with the media but it also brought me back to Bakhtin when he discussed narration and how narration is always moving because if it wasn't moving the narration would become monotone and boring for the reader.  Daniels has her narration moving in two ways: physically because you can touch and choose and expand what you want, you gain a more personal connection with the media because you are interacting with it. She also gives you the chance to expand and learn more about the prisoners she talked to. The second way is through the narration itself. She gives an authors note and little pieces here and there but you can sense the overlaying presence of her as the author in all of the notes you read or heard.

     Bakhtin aso discussed that our verbality was a social construct. That we overlook the the socio-economic genre or language that goes with reading or interacting with a text .When it comes ti Daniel's project you can see these ideas coming into play. One of the women asked the police for "help" but hey never gave it, just told her to go home and suck it up but now only 15 years later, as expressed by another woman, your children are taken away by DCS without being able to give an explanation. These may not have been in the same context with each other but the way that our society changes affected both of them. How we view many things and I believe that's what both authors had in common. This idea that everything changes as our society changes. Bakhtin and Daniels were trying to make us more aware of the changes and how they affect ours view of some things like prisons and the idea that you shouldn't judge what you don't know anything about.
   

5 comments:

Rdexheimer said...

I personally feel that it is in fact accurate to characterize Daniels' text as an essay, though perhaps with the 'hypertext' qualifier for the sake of clarity. There are definitely a multitude of voices at play within the piece. One aspect I found to be very thoughtful was the opening sequence in which Daniels (presumably) describes her approach to the prison and the duality between its exterior (public) and interior (private) and the juxtaposition of their qualities. The level of interactivity and the animated typography were also interesting design choices that compelled me to spend time exploring the different modules of the piece.

noles1128 said...

What I thought was the most effective part of Daniel's work were the voice recordings of the women in the correctional facility. In my opinion, as a reader, I thought the voice recordings brought a sense of reality to her essay. Words on a page may not come out to be personal. It is in fact a lot more difficult for a reader to be fully embellished into such a personal subject. Hearing the actual voices, made it that much more real to me.

Angela M said...

I think the audio, for me, served more of the purpose of giving the prisoners an individual voice rather than me providing one for them as I read through the text. It definitely made it more personal on that level. Becuase of the level of interaction I was unsure if you could call it an essay. Hypertext makes sense. The idea of the outside and the inside or public and private; their duality was very fascinating to me. I think it signified much more than it was meant to or maybe I as a reader read more into than she as the author had as an intention.

Cookie said...

It's definitely more realistic approach to take in. Because there are so many different things being thrown at the audience. Which is great because it provides more options. We can pick and choose different proofs. It really is a great text and it will always get different responses

lvg10 said...

The idea that Daniel's narration "moves" in two ways both the physical(user interface), and through voice is a connection to Bahktin that I didn't realize but I think it contributes to the interpretation on the part of the reader because it allows them to feel like a part of the narrative. This feeling of ownership could help her to incite the action that she's ultimately seeking.

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.