Poets in the Kitchen- finale review

What a crazy term. This course is, if all goes according to plan, my second last course of my MFA career. It's been a tumultuous term- it always is it seems, but this reflection is going to talk about my work this term, and what I've learned.

A bit of back story- when deciding courses it was between doing a study with Alec or taking a writing course. Both would have been beneficial, but when it came down to what I needed the most- it was this course. This review will look at my personal project, but also address the overall course.

My pending degree is an MFA: Interdisciplinary Studies - Theatre & Creative Technology. I am exploring autoethnographic performance in spoken word and performing arts, and looking at the parallel between live performance and how we perform ourselves online. What I needed was a course that would help me articulate the social media/online component of the project. This course has accomplished that and so much more. What I'm really interested in is the way that we create space for ourselves to voice our stories- because too many people are marginalized in what I'm discovering for myself to be an extremely oppressive, subversively oppressive state. I am so incredibly priviledged to be Canadian, and live in North America- but at the same time, I know that my priviledge will not likely ever be at the same level of priviledge as many of my peers. At least not in my lifetime, and without devaluing the moments where we make strides forward to a more egalitarian society, we are continually inundated with stories of people who do not speak, are afraid to speak, or are silenced.

Cutting to the chase- what I learned from EC&I 831- that empathy is not working, and trying to convince members of a priviledged class who remain ignorant through empathy is not working. The results are that alienated/lonely people feel more isolated. The solution- the best way I can now articulate is: we need to create and recognize and teach those of us who are marginalized that we are a part of a collective identity. We need to move past victim shaming, and move towards victim recognition- a validation of experience- a showing that we see what's happening, we're listening, and "we" includes the person that we are speaking to. When one of us is oppressed, we are all oppressed, when one of us is bullied, we are all bullied. We can not sit behind the fear of unfamiliarity and avoid the spaces that have been colonized or invaded.

In our last lecture, the room full of amazing teachers who opened up about the challenges of digital citizenship, access, bandwidth/technology, and online interaction was so refreshing and eye opening. Things turned serious when we talked about existing online, bullying, and problems our students were facing. We talked about the alienation of technology, the barriers between familiarity and vocabulary. This is something I actually was very familiar with. Discussions talked about how most students now are born with tablets/laptops/smart phones as part of their reality. Infants are learning to use devices at an alarming rate. Most young people know how to type before they know how to write.

When I was growing up, I was raised learning 4 languages at the same time. My English was fluent by grade school, I was part of a generation of Canadians who lived in a cross section of language and the associated barriers. My parents- though 'fluent' in theory, experienced many language barriers- from the ability to process information at the same rate as their tenacious young son, to racism from people who were immediately resistant to their Vietnamese/Cantonese English accent. I once apologized for their language barrier... I still remember the punishment I received. My parents who worked so hard to get to Canada, were surrounded by an unfamiliar language, and faced the fear of trying to race me in this world- everyday.

The same can be said for technology. There is still, and perhaps will always be, a steep differential between the level of comfort parents have with technology vs. the comfort their children experience. I made the bantered allusion that the current "tech talk" parents have with youths is akin to the "sex talk" Because of fear, resistance, or assumptions of comfort- these discussions do not happen to the depth that they need to. It becomes more difficult- like an online playground with no supervision where students have to navigate harassment, abuse, bullying, and learning new forms of managing relationships online. Tons of questions of privacy, and ethical behavior is always brought up. One classmate discussed how a teacher posed as a fake student with fictitious profile to infiltrate the student community to address bullying issues that arise. The only argument in this teacher's defense was that, they were able to address the bullying because they at least could find out about it.

The majority of the response was that this was UNETHICAL. And to me- this is why- and this is how it relates to my work. I've learned more and more that it's more than just the action/content- its the methodology. Like MacLuhan said, "the media is the message" I say, the "methodology is the method" because we learn more from how things are done and why things are done, than what is done. Students are now exposed to the reality that in order to "protect" them, it's suddenly OK to lie, create fake profiles, friend strangers. If found out- then any trust that was formed is broken. It also normalizes this type of behavior which makes us disregard this behavior in the future.

One teacher mentioned that 44% of students claimed that they had been bullied online, but 90% of those students felt safe at school. To me, this reads as, students have normalized teasing online- disregarding the implications of the impact of bullying, which actually feeds the stigma that those who come forward about bullying are "weak" and should just get "over it." What's worse, is that, too many people in authourity offer the solution of "get offline." All this is victim shaming. The Victims are NOT the problem, the aggressors are. Praise be to Audrey Watters, and her incredible work.

This course- fundamentally changed the way I write spoken word. I am known as a Queer Asian Artist who writes Queer Asian and Activist work, however, everything that I have written thus far has been very specific to the relationships- this comes from my background in theatre. Over the course of this term, researching thousands of videos and performances- I've been able to articulate the methodology of spoken word artists who are activists. In our work, we either speak to the aggressor, to each other, or to the masses. The course alone did not change my writing though- with all the recent news about Mike Brown, Eric Garner, and any number of other Black men who have died because of Police brutality, and the media storm that is finally recognizing the disparate level of priviledge and oppression in North America- I rediscovered my voice in a new way.

To show this difference, here is a video of a performance I had in Montreal last year. It was one of my most popular pieces- inspired by queer couples who were not able to be recognized by the law and by their families in the event that one passed away.

and then- my piece that I wrote from this course, that I performed at our last lecture:

One of the most important videos I filmed as part of Poets in the Kitchen:

My project Poets in the Kitchen has been an incredibly fun experience. I've really loved it. Unfortunately I was away for 2 weeks this term, and then when I returned from Victoria, I faced an infestation at my home, which left me unable to cook for 3 weeks, and without cooking, I could not do my project to a level of success.

That said, a lot of things went wrong, but then again- a lot of things went right. Full disclosure- before I came to the University of Regina- I was a communications specialist at the University of Waterloo. I spent my time developing a social media strategy to the entire student body. I worked within student life, and then with residence, and then within the alumni office. I studied strategies and peak release times, etc. I legitimately tried to develop a release timeline and wanted to have a couple episodes ready to launch so that I could be consistent with my postings. That is the greatest set back, and most important practice that I know I dropped- being consistent with posts and in a timely manner. I've had lots of time management issues this term.

But that was not my focus. My goals this term was to break down the methodology of making videos and cooking videos, and figure out how to articulate this in my research. The bonus was seeing how I could incorporate the aspects of my research around autoethnographic performance, autobiographical performance, and how we engage online.

This course, more than any course, helped me build the bridge between my otherwise disparate disciplines. I have been told again and again that there was a continual gap/disconnect between my use of theatre/spoken word/music/technology/community engaged art/devised work/improvisation... it's a lot. But it all fits :)

If I apply the constraint/focus on citizenship- how we take agency, and perform ourselves concurrently in a mixed reality environment, and recognize that when we are pushed to exist in multiple realities- that our means of coping is to find ourselves in these spaces by building communities. We seek validation and recognition, and create these defining features by showing what we associate with and what we distance ourselves from. Upon recognizing this- then, the discussion point I mentioned earlier about creating communal identities is a possibility.

Allan Levine's work on story telling helped to build a methodology in... how we tell stories- but perhaps more important- it showed me how OTHER people create stories- and which stories work. Readings for Danah Boyd, and discussions on disclosure- the reversal of public vs private and how we then post information that is insecure and accessible/replicable/spreadable (i.e. Alec's experiences with having his visage and content hijacked by online predators), helped me to articulate the dangers of engaging- the dangers of speaking- specifically- the risks that oppressed people have to face when they risk speaking.

ON a very personal note- this is what I'm facing. I'm a performer. I live online. I am very open- but when it comes to this type of work- I've never felt so much anxiety- not because of time management, but because I care about this so much- it was a major step for me to make videos at all- let alone- public videos. I come from a history of bullying and abuse, that I am still coping with.

Alec's lectures and our lectures on how we exist as co-creators in a network where we are ALL authours, and have the ability to broadcast ourselves to the entire network or with individuals or subgroups, and how that has changed since this work began is a historical mirroring of how the audiences I am engaging with (the spoken word artists- many of whom identified as oppressed) have had to learn and develop their own networks and simultaneously discover the networks they were born into, put into, and that they did not develop.

I've had such a hard time staying on top of the assignments. Extenuating circumstances aside, even tonight- as I write this learning summary- it's the last few hours before our deadline. I've watched, and read for days now, and unable to post. I can't yet explain the fear/resistance- but can only recognize that I am not motivated by the marks so much as I am trying to process and develop what I've learned thus far.

Referring to the network that we, the class, officially formed- I originally felt quite distant from the class. I didn't consider myself a school teacher. It wasn't until one day, a saturday, where I teach theatre to young people from ages 9-19, that I realized- these people may be in my colleagues classes.

It happened when during an improvisation- I proposed to the students that they recreate Youtube viral videos. After we developed and showed the scenes, we had a very intense discussion about them getting permission from their parents to see if we could make actual youtube videos- and we talked about why. Then I asked their feedback on the scenes they had created and one aggressively astute student had an AHA! moment. He said, "So... our comments right now... are like the comments we see online!"

It was this moment that I experienced how connected they were... and from there... I learned that a disproportionately large percentage of my students were facing SERIOUS bullying an abuse online. It only furthered my need to explore this work, and try to DO something.

On a slightly nostalgic... romantic note- I have taught/facilitated hundreds of sessions on social media and how young people engage online to parents, teachers, academics, etc. Each group seems so... resistant to the topic, and engaging online. I've worked hard to talk about the change in emotional intelligence, and how current users- even young ones- can extrapolate deeper meaning in the communications they send back and forth. I, in my hypocrisy, was about to write off these 'adults' and educators. But this course has renewed my trust by being in a room of elders and teachers who 'get it'.

In reflection of Poets in the Kitchen- I'm going to keep making videos. I've got 2 that will be posted within the week. I think that not feeling the pressure of time and grades will only help it grow. I think that as a concept it could really fly, but one thing I DID not successfully do- but I don't think I could have done- was hone in on a specific audience. I think the type of content that is 'Poets in the Kitchen' is one where I need to either create a series of recipes that people like, condense the videos into 1 video/episode, and then create accessible poetry that will also draw an audience. My goal was to exemplify the cross over between being online and spoken word/art, that didn't entirely happen- but there were some real successes too.

I feel great moving into my final term of this degree, and am grateful for what I learned in this class.

Thanks for reading y'all!

living/learning - we're always living, but not always Learned.

Alec's last lecture was an awesome catch all that connected a lot of the content in class. It reminded me of when he guest lectured in a class that I TA'd last year. It was for CTECH 110 with Dr. Rebecca Caines. He brought back some great images and resources that I have seen before, and the conversations really linked up with some of the over arching issues discussed in our last lecture: digital citizenship, digital legacy, and the impact of the digital world in a cross generational society.

One of the most memorable discussions was around the video of a young man who needed to create a fire using twine, and he posted a video online of his learning process. In the video, he asks the internet (other users/viewers) to give him feedback because he admitted that he didn't know what he was doing. What was great, was a group of people who practiced making fire in the woods responded and gave feedback. This was a perfect example of open learning/group learning online.

Alec discussed how this process of getting feedback, admitting his skill level was a means of managing his publics. He was managing his networks of viewers to apply constraints to make the process useful to him. For me- I did not immediately go to this place of managing publics- I actually was more interested in the young man's seemingly normalized methodology of preventing negative criticism and facilitating useful feedback to be successful. I think what we're talking about is along the same stream of thought- but I think I was more concerned with how aware he was of interactions online.

Perhaps some back story- about 7 years ago, I was in an interdisciplinary theatre production, "Here Be Dragons' that looked at queer migration and identity. In the production, one of our cast mates began playing on the internet, making videos of himself exploring his sexuality- either with ropes or make up, etc. Through many debates and discussions as we developed content for the show, we discovered a video of a young man posting a video of himself 'getting ready for school' which included an extensive cosmetic regimen. My cast mate shared the video with us, and was adamant in his view that it in many ways showed an 'innocence' in the users content. I completely disagreed. I can't find that original video, but here is a very comparable one.

In our debate, we challenged each other on the grounds that he found the boy "playing" and seeing an innocence in his performance. One difference between the video I posted here, and the original was that instead of the higher production quality, the other video was set in the boy's bedroom that was filled with a blend of heteronormative/gender normative decor that one might expect in a young person's room. I challenged this innocence because it didn't seem innocent. I then looked up the boy's channel and found an earlier video. Both have been removed... it has been 7 years. But that said, these were my comments in our email exchange:


"Nothing about this video shows any timid or overly excited approach to the make up. If anything, this guy knows his shit, and is doing it WELL. He KNOWS his products, he knows what is aesthetically pleasing. And this is not his momma's make up kit. THIS IS PRIDE, pride in his craft, not even gay pride- but it kind of is.  The title says, this is his morning RoUtiNe. There is no safety of his family home, because- I'll put $5 down that says this is him prepping for school or he does this on his way before school. I take that back. I think, of course, there is safety of his family home- but I don't believe that he feels bound do it. Like a new immortal from Highlander who clings to sacred ground so that he/she doesn't need to fight- no, I think this queen is a scrapper, and will take off a head or two if he needs to. Because of this, I believe he also knows what to expect from the comments section. Also, check out his channel... his two channels. This bitch is gettin' serious. For real. He ain't playin. But in it, this 'guurrrrl' is already rocking the base, shadow and lip liner. His experiment seems more to be with video than cosmetics.

 

I think that people (including him) continue to play with expression and identity, and make-up is a great way to do that. But what I'm most impressed with, and moved by- he seems to have a very clear image and idea of what he is, who he is, and what he should look like.

 

And not to take everything I just said back, but after ranting a bit- I believe what is inherintly 'innocent' about what this boy is doing, is that he isn't doing anything wrong. He moves without guilt, or shame. However, I believe he lacks the ignorance / naivete (the bambi) that experience takes away.

 

It's just that, when I think of experimentation- there is a risk of an unknown. You never know what's going to happen next. But this kid- it's been a year, he moves with such grace and experience, he even uses his own mirror less because he knows his face so well. He knows how much product to use, and which spots to accent or take away... effortless."

 

Haha, it's kind of neat to see your own writing from almost a decade ago. But I dug through the thousands of emails and found this- and am surprised that my feelings are still so similar. Please pardon the queer-centric colloquial language- it was in the context of our character development.

 

In terms of social/historical context- I think the video is incredibly brave. When there are still so many, too many stories of teen suicide and cruelty online- this sends a message of self acceptance and celebrates self expression. Though I do not applaud this man for being brave. I think that's a disservice. I think what's important about this video, and videos like it, is that it shows a normalized process of doing whatever you need to get through your day.

That to me is digital citizenship. In the face of injustice/adversity/oppression online- to simply continue to cultivate a space where you can speak, and know that you are empowered to manage your content for whatever control you have is empowering. It gives one agency to exist.

 

Once upon a time... on a blog not so far away...

What an epic last class! And thanks to Alec and Katia and the universe for giving us a week to get our stuff up. I've been furiously reading blogs, watching vids, and finally feel caught up to the final stretch- so today, expect to see a few more blog posts and recaps.

"The truth about stories is, that's all we are." Thomas King

A story is a narrative, that re-presents relationships between one or more subjects. Stories are the form in which we teach, entertain, maintain our identities. Stories can be life lessons, a folk tale, a parable, etc. Stories can be confessions, declarations, truths, and lies. I say, if stories are all that we are, then for many of us- we're one sided, half finished, and so self-centred that we don't see how we constantly telling multiple stories. This blog post is inspired by a guest lecture by Allan Lavine on digital story making. Correction, he talked a lot about story telling, but the obvious focus was digitally and the use of images.

One highlight from the session was playing pechaflickr. I was able to participate with several colleagues, where we improvised a story from seeing images that we had never seen before. It was a neat improv, where Allan provided the creative constraints that we needed to focus the story on the search for Alec, and also pick up where the previous storyteller left the story. Each of us were responsible for one image. We. Crushed. It.

It was an exercise to show the power of creative constraints, and show how people can practice to develop their presentation and storytelling skills. As a theatre creator- this is absolutely my schtick. As a theatre educator, I'm constantly referring to improvisation as a practice to develop connection speed. What I mean is, by training ourselves to release our self-consciousness we are able to connect with others at a deeper, faster level. This past summer, I attended the International Institute for Critical Studies in Improvisation in St. John's, Newfoundland. There I studied along side multidisciplinary improvisers from music, theatre, film, technologists, etc. One colleague, Jayden Pfeifer, a recent MFA candidate at the UofR studying improvisation shared some really insightful perspectives on the work. He said, "When we enter an improvisation, we're entering an agreement, and the stories and interactions we create are all based on those agreements." What he was referring to was a multi-layered look at how we collaborate in a scene/story/game. Within theatre improvisation, a common phrase is "always say 'yes'" and that refers to when one scene partner offers a suggestion, you are expected/encouraged to always say 'yes' to the suggestion with the intent of furthering the story. For example, in the Pechaflickr, there were lots of nature themed images, and also one image of a pantless person in the woods, as the story teller described this image, and offered it as part of the narrative, the other story tellers continued with that stream of narrative, even as the images changed, to build a consistency and continuity to further the story. But to what end? I believe that storytelling is a practice of connecting with a community, and building a communal identity- even if it is for a short time.

In storytelling criticism, we break down stories into characters, situations, themes. With characters- we break them down to archetypes and roles that appeal to listeners. I believe this is heightened when we integrate social media and online interactivity with storytelling. With films/stories such as Harry Potter, Star Wars, etc. Even within the stories, the characters are typed, profiled, and staged based on their personalities or abilities. All this, so that we can associate ourselves, and imagine ourselves in the story, either by the familiarity/association to one character, or the alienation/distancing from another. We get so engrossed that from the original stories, we create fan fictions, take online quizzes to see what Hogwarts House we belong to, or what type of Jedi Knight we would become. For the record I'm actually split between Raven Claw / Gryffindor. I think it's because I'm sassy, but hopefully honourable.

Anyway, my point is that we project ourselves onto stories and images- so much so, that we fill in our own narratives on other stories. And with the continual evolution of user produced content on social networks, we create our own stories to interact more with the stories we're told. I've mentioned this in previous posts, and will talk a bit more about it here, within the creative constraints that we 'agree' to, there are so many things we tell about ourselves within our stories. Suffice it to say, we share a lot about ourselves- everytime we perform. In some ways, when we tell a story, listeners engage in the narrative as much as in the way we tell it. And they are less engaged in our narrative as opposed to providing their own.

An example of this is in the memes and videos that Allan showed. The images invoke our own memories in an attempt for us to relate to what is happening. He showed a poignant budweiser drunk driving commercial, and the purpose of the story/commercial was to sell beer, but the narrative was one of animals that draw us into relate to the person who buys the beer, and his relationships to his creatures. It's one where we associate with him via the relationship he has with his dog. If we share the same views, we feel a part of the story. I think this is the core to all those viral videos, which is to say that- their spreadability is based on the level in which these stories resonate with how we indentify, and how much we distance ourselves from them.

So going back to the top, with my big bold statement about us being one sided, and self-centred... What I'm saying is that, we seek validation and want to create/be associated with specific communities so much so, that we often alienate or do not see the experiences of those who may differ from us. This is a big part of one of these affordances within social media. We actively get to choose, and have to consciously- continue to- engage within a community to maintain our membership. The best way to engage is to share our stories and demonstrate how our stories are the same.

Below I posted a video of Simon Simek. He is a social media strategist. In it, he breaks down stories in terms of sales pitch. He says, nowadays, "people don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it." I wanted to post this as a response to Allan's video from Kurt Vonnegut on the architecture of a story. In Simek's video, he breaks down many presumptions and ignorances that people have on social media advertising, and essentially how that is changing the way we communicate. More and more, with upworthy videos, and commercials online, etc. the products are not at the forefront of the videos/adverts, but it is some story or narrative, that is meant to bait us into watching it. With a witty tagline, and accessible character, we become vulnerable to them based on how they make us feel.

 I'm saying,  If we don't start listening to stories outside of our comfort/familiarity zone, we will continue to ignorantly alienate those around us, and not recognize the possibilities of other stories- which is what prevents us from having full stories. So long as we continue to be #selfie focused, we limit the ability to empathy to other people on a human level.

Thanks! Check out the vid, lmk what you think!

For Men By Men #PREACH Audry Watters

People in power strategize. Disempowered people cope.

I wasn't able to attend this lecture, but there is no lecture I'd rather have attended. This is the reason I started my work, my degree, everything.

There is a lack of accountability for violent and abusive behaviour online and offline. There is systematic oppression along race lines, gender lines, social class, sexual orientation and it is deeply rooted in a hierarchy where white male privilege dominates our society.

Too often, correction, constantly, online are micro-aggressions that are excused by the general public as young people being ignorant. I am no hero, but I have been consistently named as an ally to my female peers. I say this, because I'm going to disclose and link an article about Chris O'Neill who faced harrasment on the street as she was broadcasting the news. The story itself is one of misogyny, assault, and ignorance. But what is unsurprisingly terrible are the comments and dialogue. CBC Misogynistic 'Prank' The majority of the comments and feedback were comments against the reporter, against CBC, but immediately went to discredit her and the value of this story as 'news'. One commenter, pushed to move this discussion to disregard this as a gender issue because statistically the majority of recipients were male. I've attached some screen captures of the comments... some of them are mine- which is why I mentioned my comment about being an ally earlier- this is not about me, but my comments represent my response and opinions in 'action' if you will. I can only hope that it's more than slacktivism on my part.

In one of our early lectures, we were asked what our goals were in terms of creating community. My response was creating an open community where people were able to access and have access to resources and be able to contribute.

In my research, and spoken word practice, marginalized people are excavating, and colonizing online spaces where their voices can be heard. But the conversations and stories are framed and etched into the world of white male straight hegemony. I know many great, awesome straight white males. This is by no means a hate-on against them.

But in response to Audrey Watters, the solution I think is more thank just being part of the right network and finding allies. It's about men, and it's about EVERYONE using what priviledge we have to make space and to listen.

There is a sociologist, Dr. Leeno Karumanchery who has a company that focuses on diversity training. His talks helped me to articulate my early questions in this discussion. He gave an example of authourity and race profiling- in brief: A police car drives into a 'tougher' part of town on patrol, a young man, who has done nothing wrong, sees flashing lights. He looks over his shoulder to see the police and moves faster. The police see an individual look over their shoulder, and move faster, and thus a suspect is born. The reality is, the young man- most likely was raised in a community taught to fear the police. And by nature, we look over our shoulders when we notice something behind us. By society, the police person is already on edge, knows how they are perceived in this part of town, but is also expected to look for suspicious behavior.

I had an incident many years ago in Toronto. I was coming from a (very casual) awards ceremony... where my attire consisted of bright yellow, paisley printed summer shorts, a white collared shirt, and rainbow painted boat shoes... not exactly how I would perceive a threatening person to be. In truth, in all my 5'6, queer, enthusiastic, smaller frame- I didn't think I was a threat to anyone- specifically, that I wasn't ever perceived as one. However, about a hundred metres in front of me were two women, middle aged, and looked like they were not from the city. They gave no indication of distress, glanced back at me once, I may or may not have smiled, but kept my distance. They made a sharp turn into a building, and I assumed they had found their destination. As I walked by, I noticed them waiting, waiting for me to pass, as I continued walking, about 150 metres has passed and they walked out and continued on their way. In that moment, I realized how my maleness- even in my flamboyant costume, and self-perceived demeanor, in the context of the relationship we established- I was a strange man, in an unfamiliar city, and these women- did not feel safe.

Dr. Karumanchery talks a lot about it being OUR responsibility to walk across the street. And I can only think of the number of times that I did not walk across the street, or said something heteronormative/gendernormative... something I picked up here in Regina is the use of the term "guys." And I used to teach workshops on inclusive language. But it's such a pervading term here...

I'm saying that ally education, and creating empathy is one of the only effective ways to establish a safe space for communication so that people can exist without the fear of attack. Because political correctness, online moderators, and guidelines only help protect the space itself from liability, and associates moderation with hampering freedom and punishment. These do not respond well to people who generally aren't "bad" people, but perhaps are just ignorant, and unwilling to listen.  And this systematic alliance/support of aggressors is what silences women and marginalized people the most.

Thank you Audrey Watters for speaking. #EVERYTHINGYOUSAYISRIGHT. #KeepSpeaking

Lemongrass Ways - Reflection on Episode 4

Lemongrass ways-

I was hoping to make at least 5 episodes for the project in class. I had enough content for 6 episodes, that have been condensed into 4. This project has been incredibly exciting, but also the hardest thing I have yet to recognize.

I say this, because Episode 4 was the first of the episodes where I was unable to get an audience member to share the meal, and then share some art. It made me think about why I was doing the project, some of the challenges I’d been facing- and specifically, if it was OK to go against the parameters that I had set for myself. To be frank, a big motivator was that I needed to get content up. Haha, if this was some cooking competition- it’d be apt to say that I was/am living in the last few minutes with judges and hosts yelling “get it on the plate.”

What I discovered was that this fear, and anxiety is what held me back. I think that a lot of people go through procrastination phases, also I had a few major setbacks with my home this term- but after a lot of reflection- I couldn’t figure out what my anxiety was. And I realize it now- so it isn’t so much learning as recognition- it was the deep rooted fear of how it would be received, and the resistance to posting content… led to a spiral effect.

After each lecture that I listened to, I started writing blogs and posts, and for whatever reason- I just let them sit in my drafts. I don’t know where I picked up this habit of avoidance and fearing the work. Suffice it to say, now, reviewing them, writing them, and getting them up has been… uncomfortable and embarrassing. I haven’t been in a classroom with more than one student, as a student in a long time. Most of my work has been individual readings etc. And I lost sight of what the core part of the class was- the social/community based learning that’s so important to open learning.

So here I am, writing this reflection- with the reality that not many people will read it in time for our last lecture. But I gotta do it. I need to get something on the plate.

All that said- looking at Episode 4, there is still a lot I got from it. And I mention it in my video intro to my poem. What I got was the reason I asked to do this project to begin with. What happened with this project and this course, is that we became a network that I agreed to, but didn’t realize what I was getting into. And the priority for me was more about what I wanted to get, as opposed to engaging and connecting- in many ways, I was practicing out of a broadcast mentality- where I communicated to the masses (the class) and failed to recognize the responses back- because I don’t think I was expecting any.

It wasn’t until I received comments, and actual viewership that I realized- “oh people are listening.” Which made me suddenly feel way more visible. As an artist, though I practice in online performance- I really prefer/need a sense of immediacy with my audience. Because then I can see, and process your reaction and that, for me, establishes the relationship.

I mentioned in my last blog post about Bonnie Stewarts lecture, and in my last video about my experiences with the media. Part of the vulnerability I felt was in realizing just how visibly ‘gay’ I was. And to clarify- I’m comfortable in my own skin, and have no judgments on what would be considered stereotypical behavior- no I’m simply stating how identifiable I was/am- and the implications that has on my family/personal network. The last time that happened, I was left homeless and disowned for a while. But that didn’t compare to the heat, and attack that my parents experienced- from our relatives, from the Asian community we were a part of. And I really have/had to question if I was ready to do this again, for marks, in a class.

For the project, I made a choice to make my videos public. Anyone who looks up ingredients/recipes/anything I’m cooking could potentially see them. The reality is- they’re more likely to look up my name, than some recipe. And I had to consider if I was willing to do that- it’s a continual question. How much am I consenting to? When I’ve already shared this much- will it make a difference? This is by no means a point of bravery, I’m not proud or ashamed of my work, but it’s a continual “what if” that continues to be present in my process.

The spark of this train of thought came from comments on my actual poems. I was taken a back by the reaction, and positive feedback. I did not think anyone would actually listen to my work. That poem, ‘Shikataga Nai’ from Episode 1, went on to do quite well- nationally, and in other competitions. But what was video’d was a very rough, early draft, set to music, in a jam. It was everything I wanted it to be at the time, but it was by no means- my ‘best’ performance. So when it still was received well- I was surprised and felt more vulnerable than any ‘gay’ performance.

So in this semi-ramble reflection- as reflections sometimes are, I’m realizing more and more, how vulnerable we actually are, and how much we reveal of ourselves online.

Perfoming online, Signals and Missed Connections

Hey team,

I've been sitting on this blog post for weeks. I've been sitting on a few blog posts for weeks. So it's late, but check it out. Thanks! J.

--

Bonnie Stewart, probably my favourite lecture so far. Everything has been awesome- but the material that Bonnie discussed so far has been the closest to my research and what brings me to this course.

Boooooo.... I just found out that because I'm on my mobile devices- my macbook just doesn't seem to let Collaborate run.... I can't review old recordings :( I may have to use some computers on campus... which is tough because I'm heading off to Toronto in a week. Sigh.  Anyway, I was simply hoping to reference some specific slides, but I can just talk about them. Though I really did appreciate the lecture, and totally understand the scope/quantity of content that Bonnie had to cover, I felt like we moved really fast through stuff. So for this post, I'm going to talk a bit about my project/research and connections I made to Bonnie's lecture.

"We all have to make choices about self representation." was one of her opening lines in the lecture, and part of that discussion, she framed it in the idea that how we identify ourselves is based on the contexts of our social situations. Specifically Stewart was asking us to self identify in the context of this course. Part of how we identify ourselves is by recognizing the roles we play, and "who we want to be." Which is an affordance given to us in online social platforms. We can create our own identities, avatars, we can steal other people's identities for our own. At the same time, Bonnie argues that asking the questions "who do I want to be?" is limiting, and instead, a question she asks instead "what do I want to contribute?" I felt this beginning was great. I think speaks to how hyper aware we as users are when we go online, or how we present ourselves in any social environment where we believe ourselves to be visible.

It was about 40 minutes into the lecture when Bonnie then identified two points that really piqued my engagement. She commented on how some of our defined roles are beyond our control, in terms of how we are received online. She mentioned that how a female, person of colour, minority, etc. is read/perceived differently in many online contexts. And I should say- differently than a (young) straight, (white), male. Discussions on gamergate, trolls, online bullying were brought up. And this is part of my interest in the work.

I think there is a danger in the self-consciousness that is created, or that has been facilitated by the proliferation of social media. When Bonnie asked us to consider "who we want to be?" or "what do we want to contribute?" My instinct is to ask myself, "why do we want to engage?" For me, the immediate response is a need to connect. That's a fundamental part of social media, the social connection- and part of that is deeply rooted in needing to feel: accepted, validated, recognized, celebrated.

Unfortunately, I don't think that there is a lot of talk about the 'celebrated' part, because like all environments, online networks are an equally ideal place for harassment and abuse. In future discussions, I'm sure we'll talk about managing our publics, and I'll blog about it then. But from watching hundred of youtube videos (for this class) and as much as I'm watching the videos, I'm interested in the comments. I think this is what Stewart was responding to, when she talked about mutliple-multiple communications points "the colourful ball of string" where it's no long a single broadcast point- where I send out media to a large network of people, but we can all send to each other.

So back to those needs I mentioned above- I think that online, we feel like we have even more control on how we manicure ourselves to present the best "self" possible. This comes in the form of whatever way we want to perform our 'selfie'- be it with foodporn, or gym selfies, or trolling- we attempt to emulate content that comes before, to be recognized as part of that community, and by how well we perform within that context, we are elevated within that community through approval and likes. This generally makes sense, and is usually acceptable, until our community comes in conflict with another community.

This becomes extra complicated because we exist within multiple communities. This is what Stewart was talking about, when she mentioned the collapse of context, and I believe her quote was "I forgot my grandma/aunt/mom were on my networks." In recent news, one female gamer contacted the mother of one of the trolls who attacked her on facebook. http://uproxx.com/webculture/2014/11/this-woman-is-contacting-the-moms-of-boys-who-threaten-to-rape-her-on-twitter/

How I wanted to tie this into my research-

So I'm interested in autoethnographic performance. A lot of that is autobiographical performance- where we essentially perform ourselves, specifically telling our own stories. I've probably talked about these before. Autoethnographic performance, in a super generalized definition, is looking at the cultural contexts/implications of how we perform ourselves and commenting on it. Deirdre Heddon is a researcher who talks about autobiographical performance, and in her text: Autobiography in Performance she talks about how in any performance, whether it be creating a character that we act on stage, or another form of performance art- the artist is never able to completely separate themselves from the character/work. In this context, this idea applies in the sense that no matter how much we try to control/create/manage an online persona- so much more of ourselves are constantly revealed.

As Bonnie says, in many ways, "the more we reveal, the more vulnerable we are." For me, and I'll talk about this further in another blog, about my video project "Poets in the Kitchen" Probably one of the biggest discoveries for me... was how much more I revealed about myself when watching myself on film. On a physical level- the state of my kitchen, the decor in my home, were all part of the frame. While filming, I was really focused on showing the best knife skills I had, and trying to constantly remember every culinary cooking technique I knew. But also constantly reassuring my viewers, and also asking viewers to be nice- or instead of criticizing me- to give constructive feedback. It speaks a lot to my actual (in)security on film, which in some ways I thinks makes me a bit more accessible.

More importantly, and I talk about this in episode 4, which you'll see soon :), was how much I performed myself in terms of some of the identifiers we discussed in the lecture. I didn't notice it prior (during filming) but in the viewing- I saw how I performed my Asian identity, and especially my Queer self. And I do not mean, I was playing up any stereotype, but just noticing how I speak about my family, and how in my attempts to build rapport with a camera... or perhaps through a camera... I consciously slip in 'baits' or nuggets of my life that I think will connect with the audience, but I am unconscious of, or do not plan what nuggets I'll drop. After watching these videos, and sitting on them for a while before posting- it became a journey for me to actually upload and post. This is because I felt vulnerable. I've had lots of dealings with the media, that aversely affected my family- and in this- leading up to my last point- is where some problems come up that I'm questioning.

Not only do our personal networks conflict when differing contexts/communities clash, but also our virtual and physical communities clash.  So Bonnie added a link to an article on digital dualism vs augmented reality. In SUPER SUPER brief, she talked about how some people separate the real world from the digital, where one seems more real, and in augmented realities, there are a lot of affordances that are given in terms of how much we can engage, and feel accomplished. I feel like this blog post is running away with itself, so I want to kind of focus it in- by sharing a personal example. I talk about this in an upcoming video- so check it out!!!! #videoplug #selfpromotion

I have been in the media several times for attending the first Gay Wedding Showcase at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre, and for producing/performing in the first Queer Theatre Festival in South Western Ontario, and other activist events that support LGBTQ rights. All of these in some way have gotten back to my family, my networks in my professional career, and especially with my family- have been detrimental.

So what I'm interested in with this work- is how as much as we may define ourselves, feel alienated, or displaced- which is what many marginalized people feel- when we create a space that we want to use to perform our truths and speak our stories- we risk facing ridicule, abuse, and assault from outside communities. And because of the systematic oppressions that exist, it's not only us that are vulnerable- but the people in our lives that associate with us.

So I don't necessarily support those (and I don't think Bonnie does this- which is why I loved this lecture) that believe the conversations end with "who do you want to present online?" or even "what do you want to contribute?" but I think the reality for a lot of people is, "what do I dare contribute, because I once felt safe, and now do not?"