Digital Storytelling Progress Report…
So. I had an idea that I liked, a project that I thought was good.
But as it came along, I saw it didn't fit the timeline for the course well enough. And that community I wanted to explore? It never materialized-- at least, not for me. I have received only THREE user-submitted testimonials... And that's after making it into a contest and offering to give away two books.
So then I changed my topic. Last week I brought in the storyboard of my new idea: "Why online lectures suck. And what we can do about it." Conferencing, the instructor didn't really like how I was framing it. And as I thought about it and looked into it more, I came to agree with her.
Now I'm working-- once again-- on getting a script worked out that actually works, dealing with topic number two.
----------------------------
At this point, I'm kind of reconsidering my feelings on digital storytelling as a pedagogical tool. I feel like my original project idea was feasible, could have created a good video, and could have been completed on time. But it didn't work with the way that the class-- that classes in general-- are set up. I think the problem is the fact that different projects require different creative processes.
If you're doing something that's interview-heavy, you're going to take a lot more time gathering sources and editing, but there won't be as much time needed for other processes. Storyboards and scripts may come later if at all, once the sources let you know what they're going to say. If you're going for a Junior-League Ken Burns kind of thing, scripting and storyboarding are far more important. Your research will be mostly finding pictures to pan over. Filming won't be as time-consuming.
And those are just two broad examples. Everyone works on every project differently. You have to work with the project, you've gotta go with the grain, and let the logical demands of the project inform your timeline.
Grading and classroom supervision aren't like that, however. They have to be rationalized. People need deadlines, and the deadlines need to be the same for everyone. Introducing something like DST to students requires that you keep on them with a timeline, etc. That you supervise and micromanage and, at least to a certain extent, that you standardize. You have to schedule assignments and deadlines as if everyone's process is the same, when in fact, different projects have different timelines because they demand differing amounts of attention to different aspects of the process.
I think that DST could be an incredibly useful tool for students in, for example, a Montessori classroom, where individualized attention and learners setting their own pace is the norm. But that's not a luxury that many of us will have. Most of us will have to be in classrooms where things are, as a matter of course, basically standardized. Classroom size, teaching loads, etc. mean that this is basically outside of our control. And in that sort of setting, I'm starting to question the utility of trying to teach DST techniques, etc.
This is not a rejection of the concept as a whole, of course. I do think that it's important that scholars and teachers use techniques like this. We need to see beyond the chalkboard, the powerpoint slideshow, the monograph. And this *is* a good way to approach certain topics, and can lead to different sorts of learning outcomes for those who take the time to do it.
I'm just wondering-- is it really compatible with most people's classroom reality?
A Movie About ChatRoulette
In the course of thinking about making a short digital storytelling project about a ukulele website, I've been looking for other examples of short films, documentaries, etc. about websites and other intangible, ephemeral subjects.
The other day, thanks to boxee, I came across "A Movie About Chatroulette." While it's not exactly in the style I want to do my project, it's a really good example of how one might go about making a film-based project about a website. Chatroulette, unlike UkuleleUnderground, has the advantage of being video-based rather than text-based, but presents with other problems: How do you document something that is ephemeral, by nature always changing, anonymous, shapeless, user-defined in the moment, and always experienced between two people at a time? I think Casey Neistat does a great job of dealing with these issues.
chat roulette from Casey Neistat on Vimeo.
Why *I* Tweet
Just because Jim Groom already did it, and did it better, doesn't mean I can't jump in with my two cents.
In response to Jeff Swain's video asking, "Why Do You Tweet?"
This Just In: Warner Music Group Lacks Sense of Irony, Common Sense
Ever since Warner Music Group pitched a hissy fit over copyright infringement on Youtube, finally reaching "a new and expanded agreement" with Youtube's parent company, Google, it has been by far the most aggressive about protecting copyright claims on that sight-- often flagrantly disregarding fair use.
I have to say that personally, I don't see how a sixteen year old kid playing a Prince song on his ukulele and sharing it with friends over YouTube in any way threatens either Mr. Nelson's or WMG's intellectual property or record sales. Most of these claims are against the SPIRIT of copyright law-- as it is outlined in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution-- if not the letter of the law. But the letter of the law is on their side, at least in those cases. Less so with other claims that fall very solidly under fair use protection.
And then there's the claims that show not just that WMG is tone-deaf when it comes to the Constitution, but to basic principles of irony, like when a copyright claim on a small clip of music was used to silence a video of fair-use advocate and lawyer Larry Lessig. These are the transgressions that really point to the cluelessness of large groups of people following bureaucratic dictate with no larger guiding principle than profit.
I've gone on this little rant because I've finally gotten my first copyright complaint on YouTube.
Almost four years ago, I created the below video for a class project. I was trying to familiarize myself with basic editing programs, and to create a little video about US Labor History, with a slightly IWW sympathy.
I chose Billy Bragg's rendition of The Internationale for several reasons. The song itself was a natural choice for a video on Labor History and looking at radicalism within the producing classes. Bragg's version was in English, sung more like a folk song than an opera, and his revised lyrics emphasize a humanistic syndicalism that I feel represents some of the best aspects of American Labor in the periods between the Civil War and WWII.
The song is very much in the public domain here in the US-- though apparently not in France. I found Billy Bragg's version on a website of public domain music, and I'll admit, I didn't do my full due diligence, but as this was just a class project, I felt it was sufficient to do a bit. Finding it on that site, and then tracking down that the original version was recorded by Bragg on his Utility Records label, I felt safe. Even if the strictly educational purpose of the video-- created for a class as a primative attempt at digital pedagogy-- didn't qualify my use as fair use, and even if it wasn't viewed-- as I feel it could be-- as protected political speech... I just figured that, as the copyright holder, Billy Bragg wasn't going to go after me for making a rather lefty student project about labor history.
But it turns out that Electra re-issued the album that this appeared on, and since Warner bought Electra in 1970, yes, WMG may indeed have some sort of claim on the music. I don't have the particulars, and it depends on the nature of the reissue contracts, etc., but yes, they may have some claim.
And yes, nearly four years and nearly four thousand YouTube views later, they may well be within their rights to give me a copyright warning. Although given their scattershot approach, I'd really love the right to ask them to show me the paperwork before I believe it.
And I'm lucky, I guess. My video hasn't been silenced or taken down. I just got off with a warning. As the little automated copyright imp inside of Youtube tells me, "No action is required on your part. Your video is still available worldwide. In some cases ads may appear next to your video."
But that's when the second shoe falls, irony-wise. Yes, WMG is challenging my right to use a piece of music that is really the property of a body of people who don't believe in corporate personhood or private property. Yes, they are saying that they are the corporate owners and protectors of a song that features the lyrics:
When we fight, provoked by their aggression,
Let us be inspired by life and love.
For though they offer us concessions,
Change will not come from above!
...But I expect this sort of tone-deafness to irony. What shocks and delights me, however, is the idea of ads appearing next to my little video about the resistance and dignity of exploited workers. I wonder what products they might use to subsidize my use and pay off WMG for my use of the song. Because no matter what it is, there's a good chance that it'll be a product that is producing an unsafe product, or outsourcing American jobs to countries with fewer worker protections, or using sweatshop labor to keep prices low.
And I think, yeah-- I wouldn't mind having these images, this music, used next to such an ad. At all. Maybe it'll make people think about where their Nikes or their Chinese-built electronics come from. Maybe this ad placement will actually, despite the intentions of the corporations involved, raise consciousness a little tiny bit about the machine of production in an international economy.
Or maybe they'll eventually silence it, and I'll just have to upload it again with a crappy MIDI file of the song.
ETA: Apparently, YouTube has silenced yet another Lessig video.
Good to know you're not alone.
Haircut Redux
About a month ago, I shaved my head for a class project.
Goofing around with video editing software yesterday, as I'm trying to make a habit lately as I take Digital Storytelling this semester, I decided to recycle those photos. The result was this:
Two weeks of Student Posts of the Week…
Due to a whole set of unforeseen circumstances, I didn't post Student Posts of the Week for the week of the fifteenth, so I'm making up for that by hitting two weeks at once.
As always, I'm not able to highlight all the blog posts I felt were particularly good or interesting-- there's just far too many of them. What you have here, then, is a selection from two weeks' worth of solid student work… With extremely brief commentary from me.
Kristina Wade gives us a very nice introduction to WWII propaganda cartoons-- Education for Death and Der Fuerher's Face are two classics that no student of 20th century history should miss, and it was especially instructive to compare them to the Soviet anti-Nazi propaganda cartoon she included.
Andrew Steward presents us with a fascinating peek at what could well be the first crossover of animated characters from (very) different continuities, with a cartoon that combines two of the Fleisher Brothers' most popular properties-- Superman and Popeye. An unlikely but entertaining pairing, even if it's not one of the best Fleisher Popeye cartoons out there.
Justin Pangilinan blogs about a topic that touches on concepts of international intellectual property, fair use, digital "piracy," and fandom-- some of my favorite topics-- in his discussion of fan-subtitled ("fansubbed") anime.
Elliot Meek discusses The Snowman as an example of a longer-form silent cartoon… I hadn't seen this cartoon since I was a kid, and I'd forgotten how much I loved the art when I was little. It's a little treacly now, but it holds up as an interesting cartoon. Definitely not as good an example of long-form silent animation as the first forty five minutes of Wall-E, but at the same time, this one ends before you get the ridiculous weird fat humans in hoverchairs and the HAL-9000 rip-off baddie.
Samitra Denardo gives us an excellent introduction to John Sutherland's industrial animations, including Rhapsody of Steel, which is another can't-miss piece of animation…definitely worth checking out.
James Benjamin Davis blogged about the recent feature 9 that touches on something that I wish more students would explore in their blogs-- the assumption that just because a film is animated, it's aimed at an audience of children. Seems to have started up a bit of a discussion, too.
Finally, two really fascinating posts about Pixar: Scott Bell made me think about the way Pixar makes movies by pointing out something I'd never really thought about: Pixar movies are almost all "about" one animation problem-- Monsters, Inc. is essentially a movie about hair, for example. Jeannie Hilleary discusses the Easter Eggs that Pixar animators have left in their movies. Pixar plans their projects so far in advance that you can actually spot Wall-E in Toy Story.