Sunday, September 9, 2007
Blog #2
Discourse has the ability to be powerful, because it can birth ideas, or act as a catalysts for many different kinds of movements. Discourse can also be construed as dangerous when it acts as a catalysts for movements such as the rise of the Nazi party, but it also should be considered sensible when it is applied to movements such as women's rights or civil rights movement. Discourse is usually controlled by the media, and powerful figures. For example if an American soldier is killed in combat that person is show by the media as a patriot and a hero, and the attacker is considered a terrorist. On the other end of the spectrum he is viewed as an invader, and the terrorist is a freedom fighter and hero. It is because of the ability to control discourse rather easily by labels such as "unpatriotic", most people are funneled to believe one side of discourse, and to be blind to the other side of it. Because of this fact entire countries believed people like Hitler or Joseph McCarthy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
RG: How and when do institutions decide when discourse is helpful or harmful, in your opinion? How does this fit into Foucault's ideas of what shapes an "author"?
Interesting start; I look forward to more.
Post a Comment