Thanks to the COM352 students for contributing a bunch of new pages! I'll be moving these pages into the main area of the wiki soon.

From UMassWiki

Student comments on Thomas de Zengotita's article: The Numbing of the American Mind: Culture as Anaesthetic.

When we return to this activity (explained here), we will read other's summaries and consider whether you approached de Zengotita from a stance of "the believing game" or "the doubting game". These notions are from writer Peter Elbow.

Phase One: Thinking about WHAT we Read

Take Out Your Pencils by Dave

Summary by Andy

When reading the beginning of the Zengotita article, "The Numbing ot the American Mind," I was thinking constantly about something the Zengotita did bring up later in the article. When he was discussing the constant intake of information by people today, along with how quickly we moved on from 9/11, etc., I was thinking about the times I would be walking from my dorm to my class and all I would be thinking aobut was the weather and the ducks in the pond. While I agree that Americans are numb for the most part to tragedies, I don't believe they are all numb in the same way that Zengotita describes it. I can see a Grizzly Bear in the mountains of Montana and not think about how it looks like ones on TV, and I can sit outside on my porch listening to birds for an extended period of time, but I also got over 9/11 just as fast as anyone else did. I found this article odd because it discussed first the numbness of people today as perhaps a bad thing, then shifted to it's not that bad because there's nothing we can do about it, which led me to wonder what the point of the article is. If all Americans think the way Zengotita is telling them they do, they will have forgotten about this article and "moved on" five to ten minutes after reading it, as I know i will as soon as I finish writing down my thoughts. All the seperate realities I found confusing, and were never brought up again in the rest of the paper, which made me wonder why he even put them in in the first place. My first reaction was shock value as to how similar we found watching the events like 9/11 and Al kissing Tipper on saturday night live....their in the same category! This was a well-written article, and mildly interesting, I don't, however, quite understand it's importance, since there is no solution to our numbness ever brought up, and I'm now more concerned with posting this on the wiki correctly than how watching tragedy on TV doesn't effect me.

Summary by Anna

When I was reading Zengotita's article, "The Numbing of the American Mind", I noticed that Zenogotita emphasized the fact that as a society, we live our lives by going through the motions day by day. He used the term "numbing" as a way to express how a majority of people are naive to their environment and surroundings. Zenogotita talks about how society intentionally sets out a certain "aim" or guideline and people almost willingly live by it. Because we live in a world where we're constantly exposed to the media, we tend to adapt to the bustle of it all. Certain dynamics and situations are ordinary to us; they do not phase us. Zenogotita points out that most people do not realize the reality that they live in unless something (such as the events of 9/11) comes along and breaks up the monotony of their daily routines. The consumption of brand name products are continuously increasing and in the end, we create a sort of censorship to ourselves. Individuals will no longer be individuals but will be seen and labeled for the brands that they consume and commodify. Zenogotita writes of this to tell his audience to take a step back from their lives and realize that all of this is happening. What stood out to me the most was how he appealed to his audience by giving real-life examples. His examples enabled his audience to relate to them and understand the situation that he was trying to put forth. Annerrs 13:41, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Summary by Michael

I frequently questioned the feasibility of Zengotita’s argument, specifically his claim that we are unable to discern the real from the unreal, or one of his other mini gradations of reality. He makes the point that, since we are faced with so many options and information to absorb at once, we are unable to discern the images of reality from the fabricated advertisements which disguise themselves as real emotions and flood our conscious. I said to myself that this argument has been packages in several ways and given to me throughout the years, but the effect of the images have never been explained to me in a greater sense – that is, proof that these images have rendered us insensitive to violence etc. and as a result we are…? Has this constant absorption ruined the potential of humanity? If so, so what? I know media junkies who can discern the images they encounter and live fulfilling lives involve more than “transitional” episodes of realness. Zengotita’s argument touches upon Nietzsche’s argument that we are numb to reality because of the constant absorption we face. This is the new reality we have to deal with, and instead of discarding it for it’s manipulative and parasitic qualities, we must embrace it and create something new and better. Fotomaki 13:50, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Summary by Nick

Take Out Your Pencils: Mike B

Take Out Your Pencils: John

Kelley's Response

This article really bothered me. My notes on the first two pages were about he kept referring to September 11 as a past event. He stated that it was an event people got over rather quickly if they didn’t have a loved one involved. This angered me so much. He stated, "...Banfield scrutinizing those ferocious trial fighters through her designer spectacles." This quote and paragraph really upset me. He stated how the camera was still meant for the same people and never hesitated. This almost seems to me like reverse psychology. Perhaps the writer is trying evoke this emotion from the reader in order to get them mad and to remember. In his next part titled Fabrication, he talks about different types of reality. He criticizes those who believe that reality and fantasy are different. He argues that all reality is fabricated. This again evoked from me such an uproar. How dare he challenge what is real. His section regarding Finitude I firmly agree with. It is the state of having definite limits and being aware of them. When reading this I instantly felt a connection with this. This opinion I can comprehend and agree with. The last section which made me ponder was his last section Fast. It discussed if stress is good and makes your realize the good things in life. I think this is true. Its like a person doesn’t realize what they have until their gone. Also one cant realize how something is if they don’t know how bad it could potentially be. This article was very interesting to me. I believe it is because it caused emotion. In my opinion it does not matter if you agreed or disagreed with what was written as long as it caused a feeling or reaction. Ksweets 00:48, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

My answer

While reading the essay by Thomas de Zengotitia, I found this sentence that stood out to me "but the issue isn't can we do it; it's do we do it..."which is his claim of what we as a world should be aware of in the future. He talked about how we got over 9/11 so quickly because we had no pity for the victim's family members. The author used multiple types of examples as evidence for his claim such as of course 9/11, the media, and many more. To me his idea for writing his piece was to convince his audience to stop wondering and start doing something for a chage.Phane88 13:52, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Summary by TheFlyingScotsman

I thought that the author's claim was interesting, but lost a lot of its power because of poor writing. I found myself intrigued at the end of the second page and bored by the end of the fifth. The author is basically talking about how our generation has no trouble moving on from a traumatic experience because of our overexposure to them. I can agree with this, but when he starts talking about how other generations havn't had to deal with this I find myself disagreeing. What about generations that had to deal with droughts, wars and other life-threatening situations more so than our generation. I liked parts of this paper and I think I could have attached myself to it if it was more focused, but the overuse of questions and examples made the essay feel extremely long-winded and I felt like the point got lost in all the clutter. TheFlyingScotsman 14:15, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Summary By Jessica

Thomas de Zengotita suggests that, “reality is more fragmented than ever.” Throught his essay he makes many valid points regarding our world today. Thomas’ main argument states, “the effect of being bombarded by such a rage of realities - from the edited reality of wedding videos to the uniquely staged reality of “Survivor” - is that we become numb to the subtle differences between these varying degrees of reality.”

While reading Zengotita’s essay, I jotted down many comments. Mosty, I agreed with what he was trying to say. Thomas stated, “ The Holidays came and went, and - if you were not personally stricken by the terror of September- chances are you got over it. You moved on.” Now think about it, how is this possible? How are we able to move on from something so awful? It is because we are numb. We are numb to our surroundings. Then again on the other hand, we are still fighting a war because of September 11th. In a way, this shows that as a nation, we have not moved on. But individually, most of is have.

How about all of the new developments: cloning, artificial intelligence, robots. In a few decades people are not even going to be needed. Our jobs will be taken over by computers and robots. You won’t need to study or learn because you’ll be able to take some kind of pill that installs the information into your head. Or what about child birth? Soon you will be able to choose what color hair and eyes your baby has. Things like this show how numb we are to the changes around us. We are living in a fast lane. Take the time to stop and think about the world around us.

The media fills our heads with more and more junk everyday. We believe what we are influenced to believe, instead of reality. If something bad happens, what do we do? We try and simply forget about it, rather than see the actual problem. If something seems incurable, we would rather look away.

As they say, we need to take the time to “stop and smell the roses.” As a society, we need to take a look around us. Look at what this world is coming to. We are exposed to these rapid changes on a daily basis. So how do we just keep going? Why does is seem like we are not affected? Jessica 18:09, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Adam Take Out Your Pencils

While I agree with many of the things that Zengotita suggests in this article, I find that it is too much the generic “complaining about how the world” is kind of statement. It struck me as being the kind of paper that tells the world what is the matter with the people in it but doesn’t give any insight into what can be done to fix it.

In reading the article I found myself underlining the statements that related to how people react to what is happening in the world. For example, when he first started the article, he was talking about 9/11. He made the very valid point that even though it is possibly the most tragic thing that has ever happened, people whose lives it did not directly affect will have forgotten about it after a time period of about six months.

This made me think about how often things like this happen. People don’t take the time to actually realize anything that is going on in life, no matter how terrible it might be. This made me think specifically of Pearl Harbor. I wondered if people would even regard it as more than just another event that happened if it weren’t for the movie that was made about it a few years ago. Yes, kids learn about it in school, but nobody who is not a veteran or a family member of one from WWII actually reflects on the event. In general, people take life for granted. Nobody cares about what is going on around them unless it directly applies to them in either a positive or negative fashion. I suppose that in writing this, I have realized that I do agree with Zengotita’s point of view more than I thought I did, and it is a very interesting way to look at life.

Atshekleton 01:30, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Tom

Thomas de Zengotita's "Numbing of the American Mind" provokes some serious questions. His claim that our reality no longer exists they way it did before the Industrial Revolution is mostly valid, clearly following a line of evidence that leads to that conclusion. However, there are a few moments where I found him, I guess not quite contradicting himself, but discaliming an act that he himself was participating in. As much as he might hate it, he is part of that media that keeps Americans fed on "life", accompanied by his interesting, fast-paced dialogue. His idea that this is the only way of life for Americans in the first place, his "diagnostic" as a way of transmitting data and (unfortunately) not providing a solution backs up this contradiction so that perhaps it was intended. The entire article revolves this circular motion/problem. Yet I imagine that he did not get into all the depths and realities that exist. Or that people believe exist. What about the feeling of relief or of comfort, of joy and beauty that can arise from religion? This is an extremely important facet of almost all Americans' lives, in some way, and yet it was ignored. It could not have been that he risked controversy as he brought up obesity problems, 9/11, genetic engineering and other controversial issues during the article. So why not religion? I believe that seeing his argument through this perspective would add another dimension that could make people understand the very scary truth that he was (simply) proposing, diganosing.

The pencil activity greatly added to my understanding of the article and is a fantastic way to begin/add to a conversation on any subject. I would like to further investigate this topic for either my unit 3 paper or even just an extra, it is so intriguing. Tom 03:13, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Phase two: Thinking about HOW we Read

My Summary

The class had many diferent thoughts towards de Zengotita's writing. About half of the class wrote in belief, while the rest wrote in doubt. Although, most of us agreed on one thing. This piece of writing contained too much repetition. The class felt that de Zengotita spent a lot of time showing the problems with society, rather then telling the world how it can be fixed. Mjbrady states, "I felt his points were becoming redundant and I felt like they were being drilled into my head for the past ten pages of writing." Those in the class who believed in this essay all thought that we need to take more time in our lives to notice the little things. "I can sit outside on my porch listening to birds for an extended period of time" (Andy). Even those who disagreed with de Zengotita, still felt that he did a good job of evoking emotion from the reader. "This almost seems to me like reverse psychology. Perhaps the writer is trying evoke this emotion from the reader in order to get them mad and to remember" (Ksweets). I feel that the class had different views towards this essay, but overall we could all agree on some things. Jessica 14:11, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

John?'s Summary

Yet Another Summary

So it seems like the class had different stances on Zengotita's article. Of those who doubted the article, I noticed that these same people claimed that Zengotita was redundant in his writing. TheFlyingScotsman said that the article "lost a lot of its power because of poor writing" and the "overuse of questions and examples" made "the point [get] lost in all the clutter". Also, those who doubted this article often felt that though Zengotita presented the problem, he did not offer a solution for it.

Students who believed in Zengotita's article were generally persuaded by it because of the examples that he had provided throughout. (Which I thought was interesting because these same examples were seen as a con [excessive, unneccessary] by the doubters but at the same time, a pro [provided good evidence and explanation] for the believers). Jessica said that Zengotita "made many valid points" and went on to include many quotes from him in her summary. Annerrs 21:56, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

2nd Summary

Almost everybody from the class believed Zengotia's argument of how we humans are numb. After reading all of the summaries the pattern in all of them was that the author used a lot of evidence such as television, 9/11, having the perfect body, to back up his argument. Some believed that the evidence provided were to prove how humans get over bad things easily "Even though it was such a horrible and tragic event, all it took was around six months to forget and move on"(Esco). Esco's sentence is very important when reading Zengotia's thoughts about us regarding September 11, 2001. Even though almost everyone believed, there were also some doubters. I don't believe they are all numb in the same way that Zengotita describes it(andy). He agreed with the author in some ways but he did not believe everything that was written down and he also made a good point based on what Zengotia said. If Zengotia was write, we would all forget about this paper a few minutes later. I believed the things that the author wrote because there was evidence to convince me.Phane88 13:32, 12 April 2007 (EDT)

Summary

Most of the class agreed that Zengotita’s essay conveyed valid points concerning overexposure and how we are able to absorb traumatic events. Some found his strategy of repetition to not only be distracting, but angering and without any conclusive solution to the problems he presents. In addition to his repetition and non-conclusive summary, Mralexan interpreted the essay in a political tone without cementing evidence. “Writing an article whining about change will get you nowhere. Kick our sorry excuse for a President out of office and then you've got yourself some change!” Tom also interpreted the essay differently, seeing the contradiction in Zengotita’s argument with his act of writing the essay. “However, there are a few moments where I found him, I guess not quite contradicting himself, but discaliming an act that he himself was participating in.” Many listed questions which were later answered in the essay, or supported with some evidence by Zengotita, with few straying from his argument and taking the essay in a different direction. For those who summarized his arguments often criticized his style of writing, including the seemingly extraneous evidence.Fotomaki 13:40, 12 April 2007 (EDT)