<$BlogRSDURL$>

Monday, January 19, 2004

Epistemological obfuscation (Bauer, et al., 11) -- the study of the nature of knowledge made unclear (we assuming through verbose authors). But through this book we will be liberated from it, because as we all know it burdens discussion of methods. Did anyone else laugh just a little when reading that.

Interpretation -- that is what I'm having difficulty grasping. I interpret things differently than the next guy. I'm interested in seeing the set of standards and actually utilizing all these terms for an end result. Until then, I'll unleash my "naive observations" and hyper-critical thinking capabilities.

At some point I just get weary and wonder if there is such a thing as overanalyzation. In the article there is great information on the study of something relatively new. A new medium with endless possibilities that, obvious from the research Dr. Lambiase did, is utilizing it's medium in the same stereotypical way as other public imaging mediums. Some examples are blatant, others are interpreted.

I do wonder about the idea of bondage in relation to the Averil Levine site. I think this is just an example of a (pseudo) punk rock girl being (pseudo) punk rock. In making this observation, I've seemed to have broken one of chapter one's main points -- social research requires a degree of detachment. I know about pop culture -- I'm aware of Averil Levine. I know what she is trying to say with her image. But in noting that, what does it say that the lead singer of Good Charlotte probably has been photographed in the same way? He likes black ties and black rubber bracelets. Is he also analyzed as being contorted or tied down? Or is this really just a punk rock dress code for the year 2003?

I can see that my tendencies to not want to generalize or categorize and my somewhat unappreciation for the study of sociology is going to hinder me in this class. Oh man, did I just write that.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?