The Back to University Round Up

So this is going to be more of a chatty post, which I haven’t really done yet on this blog, so here goes…

Moving Out (Again)

Come September the 12th and it was time for me to move back to my university city and into my new house in readiness to start my second year of university. I’m not going to lie, I was nervous about this whole process, even though the first time I’d ever moved out from home was last year, when I started my first year of university. My nerves were becoming more apparent the closer the date came, caused by overthinking (completely normal in the human mind, but that doesn’t make it any less annoying) my living situation, as I was moving into a new house with five other girls, and of only two I knew well, the others I’d briefly met over the previous year. ‘What if it doesn’t work out?’, ‘What if i don’t settle in?’, ‘What if I don’t feel comfortable enough to be myself, or in other words, will I have to constantly restrain my weird self?’ But as usual, I was worrying unnecessarily and creating imaginary situations. I’ve been here just over two weeks now and I am absolutely loving it! I settled in almost instantaneously. I’ve made my room super cosy, and have already started decorating it for my favourite season, Autumn (I will insert pictures). My housemates are all lovely, and I’m already making some great memories with them, one being our weekly Bake Off evenings! I’ve been pleasantly surprised at how nice the house is, it was newly decorated for us moving in and is furnished with canvases, giving it that extra homely feeling.

Here are a few snaps of some details in my room;

 

Back to the Grind

September 19th struck the start of my second year of my university course, beginning with a lecture which i’m actually pretty excited about. For those who don’t know, I’m doing a degree in Media Studies, which is possibly one of the most diverse courses, purely being that a lot of what we study is interdisciplinary, as we often cross over into other schools of thought. For example, Sociology, Psychology, Law, English Literature, and the two more obvious ones; Film Studies and Media Production. Because basically EVERYTHING is mediated in some way in today’s society, meaning most fathomable things you can think of can be, and are, consumed through some form of media. Anyway, getting back to my first lecture of the semester, it was for my module titled Popular Genres, which means we will be studying twelve weeks’ worth of stuff about different genres, including fairy tales, horror, science fiction and children’s literature to name a few. This will include studying these popular genres with reference to the historical and cultural context that they were produced in. I also get to the choice to focus on literature in this module which I am very happy about! I’m currently reading Northern Lights by Philip Pullman as suggested by my lecturer ahead of our session on children’s literature, and I have to say, it’s very good so far. As well as my module on Popular Genres, I am also doing two other modules this semester; Visual Cultures (all about the complicated relationship between and creative usage of words and images) and Issues of Taste (exploring ideas of freedom and taste in relation to society, and in reference to the ever-changing contexts, issues and circumstances that occur over time). It is still only early days of teaching for all of my modules, so I feel like I can’t fully judge them, but this far, they all seem very interesting and I’m certainly eager to learn more about them.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this post, and I hope I haven’t made you fall asleep by talking about my university course.

If you have any questions about university, or anything else, I am happy to give you some advice!

Don’t hesitate to get in touch 🙂

 

Something to think about: The Danger of a Single Story

This post has been looming around in my draft folder for a while as i’ve been wondering what to do with it. Also partly because I feel I am trying to reach a medium between posting because I genuinely want to and not because I feel I have too. But that’s something i’m working on.

Anyhow,

I watched a TedTalk recently which I found through an online course on gender development I have been taking. The talk is titled ‘The danger of a Single Story’ and it’s by Nigerian novelist, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. I found it very thought-provoking and couldn’t help but agree with more or less everything she was saying.

In short, she basically talks about how we often create and consume one single story about a particular thing, that could be an ethnic group or a particular age group for example, and she further explores how dangerous and I agree, small minded doing this can be.

Anyway, before I go any further here’s the video so you can see it for yourself:

In the course we were asked to consider the following points;

• what happens when we reduce complex societies to simple stereotypes, to a single narrative.
• her argument that this approach, where complexity is reduced to a simple narrative, distorts our perceptions of others

Watching the Ted Talk not only made me realize, but also reminded me of how prominent stereotypes actually are in not only our minds but also in society as a whole. I think humans are very judgmental in nature, and I don’t necessarily mean that we make these judgements with cruel intentions but that it is often a subconscious act. Our opinions on people are shaped by the media from a very early age. The media seems to create an idea of a place or a person, which might be in their vested interest, made for biased reasons, or just for an easy way to categorize. And then consequently the audiences consuming this media gain a single story of a much wider picture. Religious, ethnic groups and the variety of cultures in existence, are an example of the abundantly different ways that people live around the world, and instead of emphasis being placed on understanding and accepting these different societies, they are too often simplified to having one single meaning.

And this of course is very dangerous as Chimamanda said, as an unclear vision of the world is implemented into people’s heads. And these images are repeated again and again, through word of mouth, the socialisation of children, and are of course helped along through media consumption, literature and politics. They become the dominant story in our heads. And the truth remains under wraps and is known on a much smaller scale.

Stereotyping is a form of shorthand, an easier way of categorizing people. But does this mean stereotyping is used because the media is too lazy to paint the bigger picture? Or does the media enable the public to identify national identities on a much simpler scale because our brains cannot cope with retaining the biggest, and most realistic depiction of the truth?

How can we combat single stories?

There is part of me that thinks single stories may never be resolved. I think the media, authority, political parties etc. is/ and are continuously aiming to consolidate the public’s views on the world to the point that they may unfortunately never stop. It’s quite a tricky thing to think about really because how do we know that without these other factors, as humans we still wouldn’t create these ill-informed ideas about things? But then you can argue back and say that without the media’s ability to reach audiences in the first place, for example, we wouldn’t necessarily know about immigration problems etc.

But I do also think that with greater awareness on the issue of single stories and informing people on a wider level, especially from a young age, that not everything you read is true, along with encouragement to research further and learn about things for ourselves, would help prevent single single stories being created in the first place. As a media student I was taught from day one that not everything you read is true. The public is becoming more aware of so-called ‘fake news’ now though, so that is some progress.

Reducing societies to simple stereotypes creates divides and subsequently limits our understanding of the world around us. I hope for a time in the future when we can go beyond these close-minded mentalities and concentrate on making the world a better place, without unjust and ill-informed constraints.

As always, thank you for reading!

And please feel free to leave your thoughts below in the comments section!

 

Conceptions of Freedom

Freedom. What is it, and how can It be defined? The word freedom is problematic to singularly define. And in this way is much more subjective to the individual as opposed to a simple text book definition. One person’s definition of freedom could be highly conflicting to others. Whether someone feels free or not, could be due to an array of reasons, such as the individual’s state of mind, how strict (or not) the individual’s country allows them to be and so on. So many factors can be taken into account such as social, cultural, geographical, economical etc. when deciding whether one is truly free or not. But personally, freedom to me normally coincides with my state of mind. And more often than not is related to whether I feel content with things that are going on in my life at that time. Being free to me in this way, means being unrestrained from irrational thinking.

The Paradox of Choice

I also like to think about freedom with reference to consumption. Here’s a scenario; you’re at a supermarket, and you’re down the confectionery aisle. What chocolate bar will you choose? You think you have an abundance of choice, 20 to 30 brands are sat looking at you. Double Decker, Whisper, Morrisons own etc. The packaging of that one looks bright and appealing. But this one you always used to buy from the corner shop with your 50p weekly pocket money. But this one’s the cheapest! Ooo but Cadbury has just brought out a brand new recipe, I wonder what that one’s like! PICK ME! PICK ME!

There’s too much choice, an overwhelming amount. You’re now stood, frozen in a state of indecisiveness. You start to wish there was wasn’t so many choices available to you after all. It would be easier that way, you’d be able to make a quicker decision, and limit this pointless faffing in the supermarket. You finally make a decision. But why is something so simple so anxiety provoking?

And the looming question remains; did you really have freedom of choice?

In a capitalist society, due to its economic system, emphasis is placed on choice being available, however this can seem quite domineering. With so much emphasis on consumption, even though there appears to be a freedom of choice, do we really have a choice? Or do societal factors such as anxieties around making sure you choose the right product which will impress the most people, or the product that is the current trend, imprison us and prevent us from making a decision which is solely made on our own personal choice, with disregard to any other external factor?

When we make choices whilst consciously baring in mind what other people will think of us, we are invoking a need to be regarded in a certain way by others. And not so much acting of our own individual desires. Therefore when we make consumer choices it can be said that we aren’t  making straight-forward decisions with no outward consideration to society, it is not just us singularly who are making the choice. We sometimes like to choose what everyone else is choosing, and are obsessed with how others will regard us, in regards to our choice. Choice in this way is a very social thing. We also try to make an ideal choice. For example when choosing a mobile network provider, we’ll try and go for the one with the best value for money. Making ‘the ideal choice’ is something that will most likely play a part in determining our decisions on a regular basis. But this is another reason why choices can be anxiety provoking, and it’s met with the recurring question of ‘Do I really want this?’

Freedom as the achievement of self-realisation 

The idea of positive and negative liberty, made famous by Philosopher Isaiah Berlin, creates a divide between people’s ideas of freedom. Philosopher John Stuart Mill, for example, favoured a negative conception of liberty, and perceived freedom as allowing individuals to act as they wanted, without the interference of authority. So maybe, freedom in this way means to do things that may harm the individual, like smoking or drug abuse. This also perhaps is alluding to rebellion against the constraints of authority. Furthermore, Mill clarified that individuals under this conception of liberty would only be free as long as they were not using their freedom to harm others. So it seems, a moral compass is apparent in Mill’s ideas.

On the other hand, more positive conceptions of liberty, do not link the concept of freedom with having no interference of others and authority, but instead with doing the right and rational thing. This links with Mill’s idea of first-order desire and highest-order of desire. First-order meaning choices you make which are ruled by irrational thoughts, impulse or emotions. And highest-order on the other hand; choices which are made by thinking rationally, and are often reflective of reaching your full potential. To put this into a more simpler way to understand, i’ll apply it to a personal experience;

I have often tried to lessen my usage of social media due to it often making me feel dissatisfied with my life, its fueling of unhealthy comparisons and making me feel like a mindless robot whilst using it. Basically a mixture of negative feelings. As much as I tried to stop pointlessly checking my phone to see if I had any messages, or scrolling through Instagram repeatedly, I regularly gave in to my first-order of desire (checking my phone unnecessarily ) when in actual fact I knew I would feel more mentally free if I just stopped checking my phone so much (highest-order of desire). I more recently have lessened my phone usage by at least 50% and feel more free within myself from doing so.

So in this sense, I can say I have achieved my highest-order of desire (achieving what I most wanted), but it took me a lot of attempts and failings to my first-order of desire to do so. It was an annoying habit that I wanted to break, and the addictive nature of social media meant many failings to my first-order of desire, but I got there in the end.

Freedom is a very ambiguous term, with an abundance of definitions as a result of it being so highly subjective in nature. But freedom for me is probably what Berlin coined ‘positive freedom’, in being that it is internal barriers, that keep me from being what I define as being free.

What do you define ‘freedom’ as?

 

I would love to hear your opinions and ideas, so don’t hesitate to leave a comment below!

 

Thanks for reading! 🙂

 

 

 

Is it my phone and me, or me and my phone?

 

We swim around in this fish bowl like we’re in control and we’re not. The simple fact that we think we’re autonomous is just a further example of how we’re all under a false consciousness. These items, these commodities that we hold so much value in have welded far too much power. You’d think the things we own wouldn’t be able to hold such an immense amount of control over us, that it should be us who obtain the control not the other way around. But sadly, this isn’t necessarily the case. For centuries, chosen or not, select groups have ruled over the rest of the given population, it’s a tale told repeatedly throughout history. We’re used to power structures in some way or another. But now technology has added another dimension to this structure. These are man-made objects, created by individuals much like you reading this. They started with us, and now the evolution of technology has become so advanced, we’ve lost control, we can no longer understand the ever growing, polysemic nature of these devices, the constant overflow of information is overbearing. And it is unfathomable how much more advanced it will become in the future.

Smartphones have become so intertwined into our daily lives, it seems some of us would rather lose an arm than lose our phone. We’ve also equated saying our phone has ran out of battery to our phones “dying”. We’ve essentially anthropomorphised them as a device, attributing human like qualities to them. It can be questioned as to whether this simultaneously induces an empathetic connection with our devices. Do some of us value them as highly as we do human beings? Whether this is true or not, perhaps the attributing of human like qualities to our phones exemplifies the level of prominence we’ve allowed these devices to have in our lives.

Have we established a connection with these devices as deep as real-life relationships we have with other people? Think about it though, with the colossal amount of time we give to them, it can be as much as the time we spend with the people we love the most. More than often it’s the first thing we check when we wake up and often the last thing we look at before we fall asleep. We look at them when someone’s talking to us, (and I high five the people in this world who don’t do that and go out of their way to ensure they are giving the other person their full attention). It can be like talking to a brick wall, or someone who’s there in physical form but not in spirit. If we’re not careful face to face genuine conversation will become obsolete. There’s going to come a day when no one talks to each other, and oral methods of communication which have been utilized since the dawn of man will no longer be the primary human communication, but the second or perhaps even the third. Because why use verbal communication when we could just interact solely through our phones? So many aspects of our lives have been incorporated into these devices for supposable ease, so why stop there and not just incorporate our whole lives into them? The physical world will just become meaningless and anytime spent not looking at screens but at the world around us will become burdening to our overpowering need to do everything through our smartphones. This isn’t some science fiction novel we’re talking about, but if we’re not careful, the foreseeable future. I know, sounds scary, doesn’t it?

Advancing on the potential death of verbal communication. I want to touch on the strain of interaction that I think the instantaneous nature of smartphones has created. The instant nature of messaging is tiring. Constant communication is draining. The cacophony of notifications can be overwhelming. I personally don’t want to be constantly on my phone, expected to be readily available to answer a message within a matter of minutes. There’s also not necessarily a need to apologise for replying ‘late’ to a message, why are we saying sorry for doing something else with our time, besides being on our phones? It’s more than likely not going to be urgent, so just reply in your own time. You don’t need to feel obligated to answer every voice coming from your device immediately, slow down a little, do things in your own time.

Yes, the way technology has developed has allowed messaging to be instantaneous and highly accessible, but I think as a repercussion we are taking advantage of these mediums and in turn feel like we have to overly communicate. Whatever happened to genuine face to face conversation? If we are constantly messaging each other everything we know, with every update and minor detail, what is going to be left for when we see each other face to face? There’s going to be nothing left to talk about, it’s just going to be this repeated pattern of white noise that we’ve already heard, (or should I say read on a screen). I think we now more than ever before live in a society where we feel like because the opportunity is there to keep in constant contact with each other, we’re too anxious to pass it up. We put unnecessary strain on ourselves to seek constant gratification, which can be fulfilled instantly through receiving likes on a selfie or whatever other monotonous content we create and upload.

So, how are we going to work our way around this? Smartphones aren’t just going to disappear overnight. And I’m not saying we should stop using them, I use mine myself on a regular basis as a way of communication and a quickly accessible source of information. But the main point I’m trying to emphasise is that more effort should be placed on reaching a compromise regarding the amount of time and influence we allow smartphones to have on our lives. Smartphones shouldn’t be the driving force of our lives, they should be acknowledged for what they are, but kept secondary to the things that really matter.

Tips for what I like to do when my phone becomes overwhelming (or I just simply need some time to think)

Take the time to breathe and engage in the environment around you. Try some meditation, sort through some of your old clothes, go for a walk in your local surroundings. Try and go a day without using your phone. Challenge yourself to see how long you can go without using it, experience the world solely through your own eyes, with no screens and no unnecessary interruptions. Check out http://thequietplaceproject.com/thequietplace for some guided mindfulness. Listen to some music that makes you feel calm (I listen to folk music for this reason). Or perhaps read a book and submerse yourself in another universe. I promise that these tips can really help to lighten the often-unspoken weight that technology can have on our minds and even gain you some valuable perspective.

*Here are two quotes from Matt Haig’s masterpiece ‘Reasons To Stay Alive’ (a personal favourite of mine, which I highly recommend ) to end on;

“Do not go on social media aimlessly. Always be aware of what you are doing… unchecked distractions will lead you to distraction.”

“Happiness isn’t about abandoning the world of stuff, but in appreciating it for what it is. We cannot save ourselves from suffering by buying an iPhone. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t buy one, it just means we should know such things are not ends in themselves.”

 

Thank you for reading! I am more than happy to chat to you in the comment section below. What are your thoughts on the topic of phones and social media?