Vision

I think that there are very important similarities in the ways in which actors “perform” and the ways in which we “perform.” Rigney’s reading made me think about the various social roles that we play and the ways in which we are liberated or constrained by them.  Which of the roles we play are assigned to us by society and which do we choose. Even in “choosing” social roles how much agency do we really have?  I wrote in my journal about the masks that we wear in order to perform whichever roles we need to perform, and about how some may see wearing those masks as constraining, but that sometimes wearing masks is liberating. I see some asks and “roles” as coping strategies, strategies used mostly by marginalized people to navigate these systems and this society.

Last night I was writing my journal reflection before I did the Rigney reading.  I was struggling with the journal question about wearing a mask because I feel like I have negative connotations with the word "mask", you like are intentionally performing something you are not.  I had read Goffman in my Performance and Self Esem freshmen year, and remembered liking him, so I was surprised when I realized the word "mask" brought about such negative feelings when I was writing my journal.  I think the word "mask" feels accusatory.  In Anne's class, however, when we discussed having "walls", this word did not seem as harsh.  I personally felt walls can be necessary to protect yourself and get through everyday life, and I can see why masks serve the exact same purpose.  

Last night I was writing my journal reflection before I did the Rigney reading.  I was struggling with the journal question about wearing a mask because I feel like I have negative connotations with the word "mask", you like are intentionally performing something you are not.  I had read Goffman in my Performance and Self Esem freshmen year, and remembered liking him, so I was surprised when I realized the word "mask" brought about such negative feelings when I was writing my journal.  I think the word "mask" feels accusatory.  In Anne's class, however, when we discussed having "walls", this word did not seem as harsh.  I personally felt walls can be necessary to protect yourself and get through everyday life, and I can see why masks serve the exact same purpose.  

In this week's reading, I was particularly interested in James Taylor's account in Doing Life. In his interview, Taylor expresses his desire for the Parole bill to be passed, which would allow people (presumably lifers) to be judged on a case-by-case basis for release. Taylor says that the bill would "do much to raise the hope level, the desire for betterment, reaching for the future with some hope." While I agree that such a program would encourage inmates to be on their best behavior, I can't help but think that so many of the interviewees attributed the turnarounds they've made to the fact that they were lifers. If that no longer the case, would these people who understood the need to be positive and active as a way to survive the inevitable fact that they would die in prison, still have the same mindset. So then, might such a bill encourage "good behavior" just to get to the light at the end of the tunnel, rather than encouraging true self-growth and betterment? Because Zehr's book revolves solely around lifers, I'm just honestly not sure if these significant turnarounds have been noted in non-lifers. As one of the interviewees said, it's hard to fake remorse. I feel like a program like this may encourage those who really haven't made strides to attempt to fake progress. I do, despite all that I've argued, believe that some people really do change and deserve to be recognized for that. I just have a hard time understanding the possible repercussions of such action. 

Everyone also has a SECOND POSTING DUE for the whole 360 early next week. Please review the postings everyone did, on returning from fall break, describing the sort of activism that interests you--and then BY TUESDAY @ 5 PLEASE POST AS A COMMENT HERE a description of your current thinking about our final projects for this class.

How have your own thoughts about your project evolved? Do you see your project as standing alone, or as allied w/ others? What independent actions, and what clusters of activism, can you now see emerging among our proposals?

We will meet for pizza from 6-7:30 on Wed, Nov. 7th, in the English House Lecture Hall, to discuss and organize further. Before coming to supper, please also read the second round of comments posted here, and arrive ready to share your thoughts towards next steps.

I was really struck while reading Doing Life this week, especially Tyrone Werts' assertion that the criminal justice system is something akin to slavery--we can oppose certain elements of it, like the death penalty, as cruel and unusual punishment, but we are complicit in allowing the whole, flawed system to continue. I have always considered myself very against the death penalty, since I think it is entirely inhumane and torturous, as well as hypocritical. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, and so on. I'd always just figured that the better alternative was to keep someone imprisoned for a life sentence, where they wouldn't be able to get out and commit another heinous crime, but where they would have a chance to continue their lives and better themselves. Tyrone Werts complicates this for me. Is it really ever okay to lock someone up and throw away the key for the rest of their life? I am still fully against the death penalty, and hope to work to see it repealed in all states across the US, but maybe more attention should also be paid to an anti-life sentence movement--as we have seen, it is an incredibly damaging and often unfair practice, almost as much so as the death penalty is. 

Hi all! I'm wondering who has Reading is my Window and when I cane come get it from you. [: 

Thanks! 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/24/justice/mississippi-civil-rights-lawsuit/index.html?hpt=ju_c1

I am particularly thankful for Zehr's decision to photograph the men and women in street clothes for their representation in Doing Life. The first thought I had upon cracking open the book was "Wow, these people sure don't look like prisoners." In fact, I actually had to flip back to the introduction to verify that I was indeed looking at people who would spend the rest of their lives behind bars. On one hand, I think that the choice to take these people out of their prison attire was one that influenced my inability to connect them with the institution. More so, however, this book reminded me that, "lifers" or not, these people ARE JUST PEOPLE. People who had jobs, families and aspirations. People I could have stood next to in the grocery store checkout line. Whoa. It is disappointing to me that despite this mini-epiphany, I still feel a burning desire to know why these people did what they did to land themselves in this situation. I see this as my minds attempt to understand what separates them from me. But of course, not having access to this information, separation is impossible. I wonder, know, how I will react to being with the women at the Cannery tomorrow. Will they look any less "normal" to me because they'll be wearing the prison uniform? Will I be able to more easily erect that wall of separation that I seem to subconsciously strive for because of this? I think also that there is something to be said about Zehr's use of black and white photography. I've always thought that a lack of color in photography serves to soften edges, blur the lines.