Comments on: Conspiracy in the Classroom

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:49:17 +0000

The site http://counterknowledge.com/ may be a handy resource related to this topic, they link to articles about conspiracy theories in the news media. I’m not sure how scholarly their book is but I believe they attempt to answer some of the questions you are asking in your course, mainly: “how and why do these theories gain traction?”

By: Mike R.

Mike R. — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:50:23 +0000

Please do share share my thoughts with your students if you think doing so will benefit them in any way. That’s probably the closest I’ll ever get to teaching students like that or a course like that. *sigh*

For future reference, I hereby give you my permission to reproduce anything I post publicly in this forum.

By: Bob Rehak

Bob Rehak — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:28:16 +0000

Mike: good points, as always. You’ve put your finger on one of the faultlines running through the course design, and correctly surmise that it is a strategy on my part (to set aside preconceptions about truth value and logical reasoning) that may backfire. Still, I’ve found that with Swarthmore students, you can rarely go wrong by reflecting the question back at them as an exercise in self-reflexive rigor. So … mind if I share your thoughts with them?

By: Mike R.

Mike R. — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:14:24 +0000

Bob,
This sounds like a fun, stimulating, and timely project. I’m a little concerned, however, that you may be backing away from the responsibilities it entails. Your note on materials and methods hints at a relativism that, in these times, is frankly something of a cop-out. In these days of birthers, tea parties, and deliberate death-panel disinformation, not to mention holocaust-deniers and their ilk, scholars (especially those in the humanities) have obligation to call bullshit what it is (perhaps in more subtle terms) and teach their students how to spot it. I’m talking good old-fashioned unsexy “logocentric” critical reasoning here. Maybe you only intend this relativism to be methodological, so as to see the texts/artifacts in question more clearly, but if at the end of the semester you end up with students who still can’t keep their heads above the sea of nonsense we’re all swimming in these days, then . . . something important will have been missed.

(And on another level, a course like this might be designated to fulfill some sort of collegiate critical thinking requirement, if there is one at Swarthmore and if you play your cards right).

By: Jason Mittell

Jason Mittell — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 01:15:06 +0000

Good questions – personally, I love the idea of encouraging public oddity, but you’re definitely right that if there’s no context for the projects, they might seem more sincere (and maybe even dangerous) than intended. Is there a way to frame them publicly as “art projects,” implying a bit of ironic detachment? Or maybe if they do something online, they can make them more meta-discourse, attributed to a fictional creator (but with a clarifying page framing it as a parody or commentary)? I just hate the idea of such creativity and innovative pedagogy being so unable to be shared more broadly.

We had a student at Middlebury a few years ago who did two great video projects that seemed like personal documentaries exploring his hometown and family, but slowly became more odd and paranoid, and were ultimately ambiguous as to whether they were fiction or factual. He screened them publicly with no explanation – but that was his own initiative and choice. It’s a lot different when it’s a class assignment… Good luck figuring it out!

By: Bob Rehak

Bob Rehak — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 03:26:42 +0000

Jason: I’m glad the course seems sound to you; I think my conversations with you over the years have broadened my sense of what one can do with a good topic and a good group of students. Happily, I seem to have ended up with one such group this term.

Hmm, the question of how public to go with the public displays. I worry about this myself; it’s the first time I have tried such an assignment. I feel confident that my students will do wonderful things with this assignment, but I don’t want to pressure them unnecessarily with the prospect of “public speaking,” despite the fact that so much conspiratorial discourse is already in the air today.

What do you think the tradeoffs involved in terms of public vs. private exposure are (if any), given that I asking these folks to produce work that is openly, proudly irrational? I just worry that, since I am asking them to talk about such weird theories, they risk being tagged as “weird” themselves if I make the class an object of general attention. I feel torn.

By: Jason Mittell

Jason Mittell — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:48:57 +0000

Great course! I love the idea of the Conspiracy Wall assignment – can you document these for the web? Or maybe have students devise multimedia walls? The public display is great, but it seems like a shame to have them so temporary…

By: Bob Rehak

Bob Rehak — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 19:18:50 +0000

Will: good idea — I will have to check in with my liberal overlords, er, I mean, review the lesson plan and get back to you.

By: Will Gardner

Will Gardner — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:39:44 +0000

Hi Bob,

This syllabus looks great! I hope you have a terrific semester. Maybe you could have President Obama brainwash, I mean, make a public address to your class?

Cheers,
Will

By: Bob Rehak

Bob Rehak — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 14:56:45 +0000

Jill, your course on Mediated Communication sounds great. I’d love to see the syllabus.

Shawn, thanks for the tip! I’ll be sure to check out the Bratich book.