Amusing Ourselves to Death and You Just Dont Understand - Essay Example

? English. Amusing Ourselves to Death and You Just Don’t Understand. Question The book en d Amusing Ourselves to Death (1985) by Neil Postman is a very thorough analysis of the way that modern media, and specifically television, affects western capitalist societies. The book is arranged in two parts which are in turn subdivided into smaller chapters. Part one deals with how the American media developed through the ages, with an emphasis on the printed word at first, and then the arrival of the telegraph and radio. These topics are discussed first, in a chronological order, to create a context and fill in the background. Part two looks at modern media, with an emphasis on show business, film and especially television. The structure offers two main arguments: how things have developed first of all, and then what this means for the modern world. Deborah Tannen’s You Just Don’t Understand is not arranged chronologically, but rather takes a range of different topics on the subject of men’s language and women’s language and deals with them one by one. It starts very generally, with a description of how women and men are socialized in separate spaces, and develop different techniques. The key phrase “Asymmetry” is introduced (chapter 2) and defined as the gap between the sexes. In the middle chapters more specific topics such as interruptions, and gossip are discussed, and then last chapter (chapter 10) revisits the idea of asymmetry and the author describes what to do about this mis-match, namely to open up lines of communication that both men and women can understand. An afterword written ten years after the first publication reports how successful the book was, and answers some questions which readers and critics have raised. The thematic structure suggests that the subject is being treated as a collection of observations rather than a single line of argument. It allows the author to range freely over many details. Question 2 Postman relies on the earlier ideas of media and culture scholar Marshall McLuhan and notes that “the clearest way to see through a culture is to attend to its tools for conversation.” (Postman: 1985, p. 8) From this basic observation he moves to a close examination of American discourse, looking at cultural phenomena like Las Vegas, with its focus on high risk and materialism, and the medium of television which offers unintelligent and repetitive material to keep citizens quietly consuming its hidden messages. A key issue for Postman is that dictatorship need not be obvious and violent, like a fascist regime which dominates people’s lives with physical deprivation and misery. A dictatorship can be subtle and deceptive, and television is just such a force. It is not just the message that the media offer, nor even just the medium of presentation that is important, but also the far reaching implications of both of these things together as they impact upon passive viewers. The argument is very convincing because it sums up the commercialization and “dumbing down” of television in the 1980s and 1990s and points out a number of dangers which most people have not been aware of. Deborah Tannen’s book makes many statements about the different ways that men and women use language, and explains that this is often at the root of difficulties which couples have in their relationship. Her argument is based on the discipline of linguistics, and she uses linguistic terminology in quite a technical way, explaining how these features work, and what they imply about male and female gender behaviors. A big feature of the book is its insistence that male and female styles are both equally valid: “Throughout this book, and throughout my work, I take a no-fault approach” (Tannen, 2001, p. 301) This is a laudable aim, but unfortunately the book does not always stick to it, and there is more than a touch of pro-feminist argumentation, for example in chapter on “dominance and control,” which refers to other research but without clear indication of sources. There is a lot of repetition but not much development in the argument, and so the book is convincing mainly through its many examples which seem to be borne out by common sense. Question 3. Postman uses a wide range of quotations and references from European and American literature, such as Orwell and Huxley and from scholars and philosophers. There are also facts and figures such newspaper circulation figures from the Audit Bureau of Circulations. (Postman, 1985, p. 111) The arguments are illustrated by means of observation of everyday American life. Readers are shown what the phenomena are, and most crucially how to interpret them, using theories from disciplines like linguistics and psychology as well as cultural studies. This is a scholarly book, and it rests on serious academic facts and reasoning, which makes it credible and convincing. In contrast, Deborah Tannen relies much more on “typical” examples and much less on theories. She frequently mentions her husband, her friends, and even “my great-aunt” (Tannen, 2001, p. 113), which gives the book a personal tone and this makes it sound less objective. A lot of the book rings true, however, since it describes instances that most people can identify with. It is an argument based on experience, observation and example, with some mention of other studies, which back up Tannen’s ideas. There is not much consideration of counter arguments or different approaches. The book is therefore effective, but more on an emotional than a rational level. Question 4. One of Postman’s great strengths, apart from his scholarly grasp of cultural history, is that he writes in a lively and original way. He puts together concepts which are normally viewed in separate categories, for example linking entertainment with a form of brainwashing, and this makes the reader re-evaluate what he or she already knows. His book is thought provoking, and changes the way that a reader looks at everyday things. If Postman has a weakness it is that his writing is very demanding, with a lot of original and deep ideas. This can be a challenge for some readers and there is a danger that he could lose them in his far reaching analyses. Deborah Tannen has a straightforward and accessible style that makes sense to people who are not experts in the field. She explains things through little examples and stories, which makes rather complex linguistic ideas come to life. A great advantage of her book is that it could really be used to help people in understanding more about the way humans interact with each other. A weakness of the book is, however, that some of it appears to be based on interpretations which may not be entirely scientific. The little stories from real life are picked out of her own experience, or the experience of friends, and this could mean that her work contains bias. I found the tone of the book rather didactic, but at the same time not very well researched. It reads like a self-help book and not an academic study and this detracted from its value. Question 5. Both books have been both popular and influential in the 1990s and beyond. Of the two I would recommend Neil Postman’s book more readily, simply because it takes on a very big range of deep ideas and sets the reader off on lots of new trains of thought. It really opened my eyes to things that I had not ever considered before. Tannen’s book is interesting, but I found a lot of it rather obvious, and some of it questionable because it seemed to make stereotypical judgements. Tannen’s ideas seem rather dated today, because gender relations are growing more flexible in the new millennium, and many people would not agree with this clear male/female opposition. Postman was writing before the internet, and so he could not fully anticipate what later phenomena like social media, for example, would look like but despite this, his work still appears fresh and relevant. The same basic questions like who controls the media, what messages are encoded into the formats and what effect the media have on consumers still apply and the theories that he suggested help to view what is happening now with a good basic understanding of discourse, commodification, and political manipulation. References Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves to Death. New York: Penguin, 1985. Tannen, Deborah. You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: First Quill, 2001. [First published 1990] Read More