I think that Daniel’s Public Secrets functions as a working
model that exemplifies exactly what heteroglossia is, a plurality of voices
within a text (or piece of media) that make up the entirety of the piece as a
whole, or one unit. Daniel’s
literally accomplishes this plurality of voices through the use of a webtext
medium, which I believe enhances the effectiveness of the text. By allowing us access to each
individual’s audio interview/recording we gain a further understanding of the
prison system and it’s relation to the world through a variety of
perspectives. I believe this is
heteroglossia, if you were to digest a text or piece of media through only one
perspective you would only be left with a partial understanding, or fragment of
the whole.
All of these different voices are pieces of a whole, and the more voices you silence or take a way the more biased your view of a subject will become because of limited information. I really enjoyed Daniel’s use of the webtext as her medium, and felt that the audio clips helped to give weight/significance to what these women were saying. You could hear the hurt, sense of injustice, guilt, or resentment in their voice that would not necessarily be conveyed as effectively if we were just reading the text. This allows us as an audience to invest on an emotional level and connect with these women with more ease, therefore enhancing the impact this webtext has on us as readers.
All of these different voices are pieces of a whole, and the more voices you silence or take a way the more biased your view of a subject will become because of limited information. I really enjoyed Daniel’s use of the webtext as her medium, and felt that the audio clips helped to give weight/significance to what these women were saying. You could hear the hurt, sense of injustice, guilt, or resentment in their voice that would not necessarily be conveyed as effectively if we were just reading the text. This allows us as an audience to invest on an emotional level and connect with these women with more ease, therefore enhancing the impact this webtext has on us as readers.
3 comments:
I found this interesting because it raised to me the question of "who is the author?" These women were contributing their own voices so does this make them co-authors?
I believe you could look at it that way. However, my perception of the women was more as characters in Daniel's story, each of their narratives making up a part of the webtext as a whole. But ultimately Daniel's was the one who categorized and arranged their statements, and noted their rhetorical significance / relationship to one another, which makes me view her as the author and the audio clips as support (supporting characters/various lens' which make up the whole).
I didn't even think of the audio factor as a further emotional connection, but I think that's an awesome point. The audio interview that struck me most was the woman who was talking about being strip searched because she stuttered more than any other interview I listened to. Of course I don't know this woman's background, but stuttering is sometimes associated with anxiety, so I was led to believe that she had anxiety because she was constantly being violated and mistreated in the prison. This definitely had more of an emotional impact on me and made me side with the prisoners (successfully pushing me away from the typical civilian point of view).
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.