In Praise of dumbing Down

For the past few years the phrase ‘dumbing down’ has been applied liberally to just about every area of life. It is an insult, a quick and cheap way of shutting someone up by claiming they are oversimplifying something or don’t know what they’re talking about.

I’ve never been keen on the phrase myself – I think people who use it are lazy; dumbing down, in fact.
A regular columnist for The Times Higher Educational Supplement, Frank furedi, a professor of sociology, uses the term freely and implies it even more in his increasingly nonsensical articles and, just out, his latest book: Where Have All the Intellectuals Gone?: Confronting 21st Century Philistinism.

Furedi, and many like him, bemoan the rise of a world that pretends anyone can have access to knowledge and understanding. He unashamedly demands that universities be elitest, that the children of the working classes be left to be workers while people like him get on and think seriously all day about how best to increase the intellectual inequalities in society.

This whole dumbing down thing preoccupies me a lot at the moment. Since I started teaching I’ve been trying to find ways of taking subjects that traditionally turn people off and making them interesting. Unlike Mr Furedi I don’t think finding something uninteresting is the fault of the student, but of the subject and its champions. There is no subject in the world so complicated that it can’t be explained in plain English. It doesn’t stop it being complex to understand fully, but why should it be impossible to understand at all?

In the past few weeks I’ve been writing a book (due out next summer) about visual communication and I’ve been worrying a lot about it. The reason is that the book offers an opportunity for me to put something concrete on my CV under ‘publications’, something all academics need if they are to progress to the holy grail of a full-time post rather than, as I do at the moment, have to keep at least three or four jobs on the go just to make ends meet (which they don’t, incidentally). So on the one hand I have an audience in mind: my academic peers and masters. I need to produce a book that will help me gain entry into the ivory towers, so I need to make sure it is full of footnotes, brown-nosed cross references to the people who count, and essentially written in an impenetrable manner. The rule of thumb is that readability is inversely proportional to academic worth.

But my real audience is somewhat different: the book is aimed at first year undergraduates on practice-based design courses who traditionally view ‘theory’ as something to run away from as quickly as possible. Not because, as I say, the concepts are scary or impossible for them to follow, but generally because they are taught in such a way as to say ‘if you don’t understand this you’re thick’.

Let me tell you something. I’m a fan of Baudrillard, I find his theories bold and imaginative and not much different from my own ideas about the way the world works; but the man can’t write. I was reading some of his stuff last weekend and found myself having to re-read sentences several times. No wonder there’s such a market for ‘Baudrillard made easy’ books – and I admit to using them. If he could write like Douglas Adams we'd be living in a far, far better world.

So I’ve written this book in a way that those who’ve read drafts have said is clear and easy to understand. So I should be pleased about that, yes?

No. I’m actually worried about it because I know I’m effectively shooting my academic career not so much in the foot as the head – it’s terminal. The anti-dumbing down brigade is the equivalent of the intellectual mafia, shouting so loudly that they are in effect academic bullies determined to preserve ‘standards’ (rather than improve them) not by advancing their subjects but by making them impenetrable to all but the pre-vetted elite. That entry to this elite is determined by cultural and financial capital makes it even worse – how dare the self-taught son of a postman who never went to proper university dare publish a book that makes communication theory, cultural theory and even semiotics 'easy to understand'?

I find the ‘dumbing down’ brigade reprehensible. The other day I gave a lecture on communication theory to nearly 80 first year students and did it in my usual way. I introduced Shannon and Weaver’s process model by running a game of Chinese Whispers, and prefaced semiotics by asking a student to draw things on the whiteboard while the rest shouted answers out Pictionary-style.

I suspect 80 students left with at least some understanding of basic semiotics and communication theory. Most will have left with a very good understanding and an enthusiasm for the subject that will lead them to read more on it and discuss it with their friends. But the ‘dumbing down’ brigade would have been turning in their graves if they had been dead. I really should have used a traditional lecture with slides, read from a paper and followed up with a pile of reading and an essay. Out of the 80 students I bet not one would have left with enthusiasm for anything except a stiff drink.

I have sat in lectures by leading authorities in their subject that have resulted in confusion and a determination never to darken that subject’s door again – and I mean by me, not by students. People with postgraduate qualifications prepare to talk to people with nothing more than an A-level (at best) without making any concessions. I went to one lecture on subcultures – an interesting topic that should really engage the fashion students in the audience, you’d think – that in the first sentence mentioned hegemony but never once explained what it was. When I suggested to a colleague that this was a problem I was told in no uncertain terms that this was ‘dumbing down’ and that if students don’t know something they should go off and find out. Ah, the GOFO teaching technique (or FOFO as I prefer to call it).

But this doesn’t help me. I want my book to be a CV enhancer and career resuscitator, not my suicide note.

Then one morning, it struck me. I was in the shower, where all the best ideas come, going over the book’s central argument (that all design is political but whether we consent to its commissioner’s worldview, negotiate our own response or engage in conflict is our decision) I realised that most of chapter one is given over to the idea that communication theory tells us the best way to communicate something complex is to make it easy to understand. My approach to writing the book is confirmed by the very subject matter, and it’s an argument that has been used not just by communications and cultural theorists but by sociologists like my old friend Mr Frank Furedi. Arguing against speaking plainly is a way of defending an ideological process whereby those who can talk the talk can impose their views on everyone else not because the views are right but because the situation keeps them where they are. The barbarians are at the gate, and people like me who advocate getting people interested in how the bloody locks work are a threat to their position.

If ‘dumbing down’ is a phrase that’s not going to go away then let’s change its meaning. If dumbing down helps people who otherwise were literally, but not intellectually, ignorant to understand the way the world works then let’s have more of it. And if I hear a critic describe my book as dumbing down I’ll take it as a compliment.

Christmas is coming...

I've just got back from one of those night-time trips to the local Co-Op for cat food that also resulted in me now sitting here eating a family pack of Haribo Star Mix, evil little buggers that lie just on the wrong side of moreishness (is that a real word?)
What really irritated me about the visit was I stumbled on the store workers stacking a whole wall's-worth of Christmas confectionary and other stuff: selection boxes, sweet mince meat and advent calendars.
I had spotted the first little bits and bobs in another supermarket in late August but let it go because it wasn't much, but this is the first overt Christmas theming I've seen this year and, quite frankly, I'm disgusted. Not so much because of the indecent haste with which summer has been consigned to the past, nor the clash of pagan Hallowe'en masks and Christian festival (since when did the British celebrate Hallowe'en anyway?).
No, what really pisses me off about this is that I'm thirty-four in three weeks' time and my "Christmas gets earlier every year" mental tirade makes me feel really, really old.
Thirty years ago I would have started aching for Christmas round about now (after my birthday of course) and it would have seemed an age before it arrived, all the worse for the shops, the TV ads, the smell of bonfires on November 5th that seem to linger right through to the end of December, and the itch of glitter used in school to make cards and decorations but that somehow gets everywhere except on the paper and the glue.
But now I think "Bugger. I'm old"

I think I'm actually dreading this one because next year I reach the average age for marriage in this country, as well as the age where I become a member of various "at risk" groups - heart attack, stroke (these sweets are helping me on the way), several different types of cancer that - god fordbid I should offend here - see far more men off than breast cancer does women but go realtively ignored, and suicide. Presumably it's all the cheery news about being "at risk" that leads to suicide if the others don't get you.

So next year beckons already, thanks to the confectionary industry, and with it the prospect of premature death due to some ailment or by my own hand, or marriage. It's not much to look forward to is it?

Sad flamingo tries to hatch stone

I'm quite busy at the moment, working on two interesting projects (of which, details soon!) and getting into the swing of the new academic year - quite a lot of really fascinating ideas coming out of this year's dissertation students so it might be an interesting term.

But in lieu of a more substantive post on design or education, or Florida's third world election system, I thought I'd post this article as it made me go ahhhh... There's a lesson for us all here - not sure what it is yet, but a lesson to be sure.

BBC NEWS | England | Gloucestershire | Sad flamingo tries to hatch stone: "Sad flamingo tries to hatch stone

A lonely and confused male flamingo has caused a flap at a nature reserve in Gloucestershire.

Andy, an Andean flamingo, spent a fortnight trying to incubate a pebble which he has mistaken for an egg.

Wardens at the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust in Slimbridge first thought the 40-year-old bird had injured himself.

Nigel Jarrett, a bird nesting expert, said: 'The birds are very attentive and do make excellent fathers, but this is above and beyond the call of duty.'

Mr Jarrett eventually replaced the pebble with a wooden replica of a flamingo egg.

Two weeks on, Andy is still there, leaving the 'egg' for only an hour a day when he goes to feed.

Mr Jarrett said: 'We let Andy sit on the replica in case a female flamingo for some reason rejected her own egg.

'We could have then placed the rejected egg under Andy for him to incubate as an alternative parent.'

Breeding season

Mr Jarrett believes Andy's broodiness is down to his body being full of hormones at the end of the breeding season.

'He doesn't seem to have a mate. It's possible that he did have a partner and for some reason their egg didn't survive as they can be snatched by gulls and crows.

'His mate may have left after the egg disappeared, but Andy may still not have noticed and carried on, thinking the pebble was a prospective chick.'"

Mess

I honestly don't know where mess comes from. I tidied up last week before going away for three days leaving the house to Pickle and the cat sitter. I got back on the Friday night to see the place as tidy as I'd left it, and smelling of vanilla air freshener.

The next morning I went to London to meet an old student (very drunken afternoon/evening as it turned out) and spent most of Sunday sitting very, very still indeed.

Monday I was up at 4.45am as I had to go to Leicester and wasn't back until 8pm. Went straight to bed after watching Law and Order.

Tuesday I went into work and then sat at the computer all night trying to get my new Palm to work. Wednesday I spent at home trying to write a sample chapter of my new book and then went to the gym, followed by a rare early night.

Now here I am writing this surrounded by old newspapers I don't remember buying, a pile of washing up (did I eat this week?), a fetid bathroom (personally i am clean, but when i shower it obviously just gets sprayed over the walls rather than going down the drain) and a bedroom piled high with dirty washing and a desk covered in paper, books and CDs (even though I don't play CDs anymore, as I use iTunes streaming wirelessly to my stereo).

Where does it come from? I haven't done anything this week!

Maybe it's a girl thing? The messier the flat the more likely I am to get a surprise visitor who will have a go at me about the mess only for me to protest that it was tidy yesterday and it's not normally like this, honest.

iTunes now playing: Summa from the album Summa by Part, Arvo

Buzz off...

This movie apparently won first prize in the Philips Digital Art Festival. It's rather clever - move your mouse around the image, then rest it on the guy's nose.

I am better than your kids.

It's been a long week and it's only Tuesday. No wonder I found myself laughing at this. I shouldn't, but I did - take a look for yourself at I am better than your kids.

If you work in an office with lots of people, chances are that you work with a person who hangs pictures up that their kids have drawn. The pictures are always of some stupid flower or a tree with wheels. These pictures suck; I could draw pictures much better. In fact, I can spell, do math and run faster than your kids. So being that my skills are obviously superior to those of children, I've taken the liberty to judge art work done by other kids on the internet. I'll be assigning a grade A through F for each piece

Consumer choice redefined

MSN Entertainment - Music: "How can I get MSN Music downloads to play on my iPod?

Unfortunately Apple refuses to support the popular Windows Media format on the iPod, choosing to only support their own proprietary DRM format. If you are an iPod owner and are unhappy about this, please send feedback to Apple and ask them to change their policy and interoperate with other music services.


There are more than 70 portable audio devices that support MSN Music today, and we hope that someday Apple decides to join with the industry and support consumer choice."

Ah. That'll be the 70% of consumers who have chosen to buy iPods then? (I was on a long train journey today and it seemed every other person was listening to an iPod).

The irony is, Microsoft's new music download service (like Real's, who are also pushing Apple to 'support customer choice) doesn't work unless you use the latest version of Windows. Could I sue, as a Mac user? I wonder...

Apple's iPod and iTunes work on Macs and Windows, and supports MP3, WAV, AIFF, MP4/AAC as well as the DRM-enabled AAC files from the iTunes Music Store. So much for consumer choice. MS and Real appear to be attempting to create a myth of incompatability. Sadly, so many people blindly use their products as they're automatically downloaded and installed, they might just win this one.

US-Election.org: The world's voice, the world's vote

On the radio this morning I heard the report of Bush's acceptance speech and mention of him being re-elected as "leader of the free world". trouble is, only a tiny proportion of that "free world" is actually allowed to vote in the election (60 days and counting).
In my book, that's not democracy - that's a dictatorship. Perhaps it's time for truly universal suffrage and the extension of voting rights in this election to everyone with a vested interest.

Anyone who believes the President of the USA is the leader of the free world has a duty to vote on behalf of the free world. Looking at US-Election.org: The world's voice, the world's vote the free world want's Kerry by 71% to 10%. If Bush really believes in the God-given democratic system (and oh boy did I nearly throw up at that point), he should be praying in earnest tonight.

The Presidential election in the United States has an impact on people in countries throughout the world, yet only US citizens are permitted to vote in that election. US-election.org is a Web site designed to permit people throughout the world to cast a ballot in the US election.   To learn more about the people that built this site, click on About Us at the bottom of the page.

The ballot will not count, at least in the sense that it will not help determine the outcome of the US election. But it will make it possible for you to express your viewpoint and have your voice added to those of others around the world. The results of your vote and those of all other votes will be shown,  country by country, on this site.