The Death of the Author

During the recent CoP seminar we took a look at the text called The Death of the Author, by Roland Barthes. It questions who the real author of the text is and the readers role within reading the text. Not even text specifically, it can be anything from a drawing to a play, or rather relevantly animation. Basically anything created by one person and can be read by another. "The Author is thought to nourish the book, which is to say that he exists before it, thinks, offers, lives for it, is in the same relation of antecedence to his work as a father to his child" (Barthes, 1968). This means that it is often assumed that the author is to its creation as a father to a child, and can claim creation upon it. However Barthes argues that this is not true, and the idea of authorship needs to be rethought, because a creation is a mere manifestation of a conscious mind regurgitating its beliefs, surroundings, languages, ideas, cultures,philosophies. So the self proclaimed authors are just borrowing ideas from something or someone they already know.

 For example, in animation, the animator would be considered the mastermind behind the creation, however the animator just manipulated tools or software that was already invented by someone else, and telling a story where bits and pieces are put together from all sorts of different experiences and research, creating something that might be new and unseen. So when we read into a piece of work, we tend to focus on the authors beliefs and ideas, however the truth is their ideas and beliefs belong to no one in particular. That being said, if we shouldn't be looking at the author, then were should we look?  ‘Once the Author is removed, the claim to decipher the text becomes quite futile’ Barthes. R (1997) meaning that every reader interprets the text in his own way, therefore creating an author from with himself. The meaning of a creation is alive only when it is interpreted, and through the lens of every bodies different belief systems and ideas there is infinite ways to interpret everything so there for ‘ A text’s unity lies not in its origin but in its destination’ Barthes. R (1997). However in a capitalism driven society there has to be a figurehead for any creation in order for it to be successful, so that it can be branded and merchandised. A good example would be Pixar. Some might say that John Lasseter the chief creative officer of Pixar is the visionary who makes all these beautiful stories like Toy Story or Bugs Life to come to life and if it weren't for him they probably would have not been created. However behind every Pixar movie there is hundreds of creatives responsible, storyboard artists, animators, software engineers, scriptwriters and such. Every movie is a collaborative effort and the credit should not go to one person. But it does, because people need award ceremonies and someone to worship. And the industry needs something to sell. This subject is touched on the Netflix series Bojack Horseman, where a has-been Hollywood star decides to publish an autobiography written by a ghost writer. Basically the entertainment industry recognizes the need of the consumer and provides the solution, which in this case would be a relateble social figure who was once been worshiped and glorified but appears to be like any other human being- flawed. And since the celebrity has no talent for writing the ghostwriter does everything for him without taking any credit. So in this case when people are looking to the author for answers they could not be any further from the truth. "The figure of the author implied a totalitarian control over creative activity and seemed an essential ingredient of high art." 1996 Rock M. Which means the author overlooked the entire process and made sure that it represented his or her name exactly as envisioned and is consistent within its work. So if a person sees that there is a new Pixar movie out, they are going to buy tickets and see it because "it's by Pixar, it has to be good".
To conclude, every piece of work or creation we read comes from an author within us, and we interpret everything in our own way, there is really no need for the author, there is only the need for a reader. But nowadays in order to be successful in the industry, ones work and therefore ones name has to sell, so that there would always be readers keeping the creation alive.

Rock. M (1996, 'The Design of the Author', Eye No. 2)
Barthes. R (1968, 'The Death of the Author', London, Fontana.)

Flipped Classroom

Flipped classroom flips the hierarchy of traditional education and centers the educational process on the student. It allows the student to be very deeply embedded into what ever they're learning. We looked at this idea through the lens of Jacques Rancier,one of the latest popular French philosophers.
In May 1969 France, a revolutionary moment took place, lead by students and young people. Soon enough the movement spread to the working class. These students were revolting against the fact that the upper education was elitist, also protested the increased specialism. This education was dis-empowering, it was training people to become a machine that fits into a flawed society without trying to improve it or innovate.
The way these students gathered attention was by taking control over universities. They also took over the school of fine art and turned it into a factory for pamphlets and revolution related art. One of the most famous slogans was sous les paves, la plage, meaning under repression and pavement there is beauty. The movement did not succeed, however it did shake up a new way of thinking about education. Louis Althusser was one of the student radicals, he was a French Marxist, his most famous theory was Ideology and Ideological State Apparatus, in which he explored the reasons why society maintains the social structures and it is by two main ways- the repressive apparatus and ideological apparatus. The number one institution that keeps capitalism reproducing and living is school. It separates everyone individually and makes students superior or inferior to their fellow man. Schools introduce and adapts young people to the capitalist social structure.
Ranciere in his book The Politics of Aesthetics explains that the world is not equally available to everyone, this distribution determines who can participate in certain things, for instance galleries picking which work to put up. This separated society makes people compete with each other, teachers who take part of the classroom hierarchy imply that the lecturer is more intelligent than the student which is very negative. So that idea of May 68 runs through Ranciers work, and it challenges the established social structure and especially the educational system. Another of Ranciers books The Ignorant Schoolmaster explores the idea of taking the teacher away from the classroom and speculating what the example of Joseph Jacotot means in relation to education. The teacher is socializing students into the dependence of others, making them think that some students are better than others and cuts of any possible intellectual emancipation. He poses the question what a society would look like if it was formed by the assumption that everyone is equally intelligent. However he concluded that this would never take, but it will not perish. It must be announced to everyone. The institution closest to the Ranciere model is The School of Damned. It is based in London, and it is an autonomous art school. It is entirely student controlled, the curriculum's are decided by the students, after the year is finished they have to let go of the curriculum's and let the next year students take over. This lets the exchange of intellectual and art related labor take place. It is a model that is outside of capitalism and it shows that there is possibility for a flipped classroom to thrive.
To conclude-
SELF EDUCATION= EMANCIPATION

Research and Epistemology

So we had a lecture about research and epistemology. We were briefed on the key things expected in our academic work in order to be a successful practitioner-  reflection, analysis, evaluation. Also we looked at the structure of our modules and broke them down into three main directions which we need to improve along side each other:
Context of Practice- theory, Personal Professional Practice- professionalism, Studio Practice- practice. Basically, CoP is there for integrating theory into practice. Synthesis, evaluation, knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis.
You have to start somewhere, and the best place to start is research.
Research can be many things, it can be a process of finding out, of trying to do something. Research as a process is more important than the end result. It is a part of growing. It's not about clarifying, it's about exploring. Research is about brighter ideas putting them together and its okay to fail!
The main driving force of research is ideas. In order to generate ideas you have to engage into things that stimulate us. When you're working with that kind of approach, you see what is out there and use it for your own ideas. There's also a systematic approach is taking something, change and play with it to generate ideas. There is also the intuitive approach. It is a sort of eureka moment. So then, what is research? Its a process of learning facts, it is based on using what you already know and expanding on that. Its also collection of information, using a verity of sources and then analysis of the gained knowledge.  If you're not asking questions, you are not researching. Research can be broken down into 4 types:
Primary research- it doesn't exist yet, we create it for a specific problem.
Secondary research- its already existing research that we use to relate to our problem.
Quantitive research- relies on factual statistical research.
Qualitative research- its based on something that is impossible to measure. But you can gather information and weigh the probabilities.
All this poses a question: Whats is information in Relation to research?
Is results from a process. It has to be relevant and useful. It has to be competently gathered.
There is a range of methods to research;
Phase one, assimilation. It is an accumulation and ordering of general information
Phase two, general study
Phase three, development
Phase four, communication

It can also start from analysis-
What the problem is about
What am I asked to do
You might have to go back and forth on analyzing and what you are doing currently.
After research, there is evaluation, and then solution.
The key to this is STARTING ANYWHERE!!!
Research is what you do when you don't know what to do. That's the premise of research. Its about developing something new.