It has been brought to my attention through a few arching of eyebrows that a blog is a questionable medium for an Honors Thesis. Here I defend the choice.
Never having been asked to do a thesis before, and not entirely sure what one was until it was upon me, I searched high and low for a suitable project. I knew that Loyola's Honors Program had in the past encouraged many creative approaches to theses that were relevant to the students' diverse areas of interest and expertise. I knew that I wanted to do something interdisciplinary and cumulative of my hodge-podge education, synthesizing my studies of Spanish, English, and Environmental Studies (amongst the liberal arts cornucopia). I chose to examine language, and knew I needed a medium that could mirror this subject.
I chose to undertake a blog, without much prior experience, because I felt it had incredible potential as a medium for which to explore language and that could speak to the nature of language itself. The same potential could not be harnessed from other mediums I considered, such as the traditional 30 page paper, with format carefully designed against mutations, necessary meanderings of thought sheared and spontaneity suppressed. And I'm not much for interpretative dance.
I liked the blog for its transparency, that the unfolding process could be seen, not just the end result. Whereas a dissertation paper is presented as a single conclusive gesture, one fell swoop of "Ah Ha!", the blog, which builds with multiple posts over time, is exposed in all its palpitations, all its frustrations and questions, its nuanced shifts in perspective and small triumphs. Though displaying equally my moments of clarity as my uncertainties was daunting, I felt that language too evolves over time, without direct route but changes course under many influences, and so a blog was fitting. And unlike a thesis paper which may crust over forgotten in a filing cabinet upon completion, a blog like language has no completion, and may be constantly renewed when its waters begin to stagnate.
Perhaps the most obvious characteristic of a blog that makes it analogous to language is that it is formed through interaction. A thesis paper is a mostly one-sided affair, in that it traditionally has one writer, interacting perhaps with multiple sources, but is to be read (unless published) by a select few. Like a successful blog, language is a collaborative affair, and is owned by no one in particular but created constantly by many. And so I wished also for my project about language to be, a product of an exchange of ideas with many authors. In accordance with the Greek origin of the word thesis, which is a "setting down," I wanted to set down but a platform for discussion, an arena for interaction that would include many participants--a thesis as a simulation of language.
Unfortunately, with this expectation for the project I also experienced its shortcoming, or my own shortcoming as a novice blog-starter. While the blog did receive comments from at least 8 other individuals, whose contribution and insight I was thoroughly grateful for, it did not "take off" as I had in my imagination hoped for. I may have invited contributors a bit too late, and my delay is a testament to how intimidating it can be to be so open with your embryonic thoughts so exposed. Whereas paper-writing is a safe-zone between yourself and one or a few individuals (in the case of an Honors thesis, chosen and presumably trusted individuals, as we selected our thesis adviser), in staging my thesis in an immortal public medium, it is ever-open to the criticism and private judgments of others. Which can be unnerving.
It therefore took me a couple of months after beginning to take the plunge and make it public, which could have worked against it. I suspect that after having written several posts and then inviting others to read it, I gave the impression that the project was sailing along fine, when actually the converse was true and I needed their input to achieve the vision I had of it. It is possible that had they been present at the moment of its birth, they would have felt more connected to the seeing through of its development. Regardless, though the deadline is near for the evaluative purposes of a university requirement, I am glad to know that my project will still be out there, full of potential for more growth. Just like language, as long as there are partakers, active or passive, there can be no end. And although the project did not manifest as I had planned, I am satisfied with what it has become, as its own organism, with its own plan. Like vines that stretch to grow to the sun, the blog responds to sparks of curiosity, and grows in pursuit of them.
As far as the informality factor that is often a point raised against Internet writing, that what is posted is anonymous and indiscriminate, too lax in procedural academic rigor to offer anything of solid substance, I can only leave to the discernment of the reader. Certainly different people may reap more or less from it, but I do suggest that as in any pursuit of understanding, one will only take from it as much as he or she chooses to engage. As for my part, I would claim to be anything but the master of this material, and only share how far I've come in seeking to understand something as intricate and all-pervading as language. My hope is that in providing the platform that I have, far deeper inquiries into the nature of language can be made by others, sparked by either excitement or aversion to even one or two of my words. It is not my main concern that many others find resonance in my musings, as much as that the conversation, of agreement or opposition, finds its way into the open.
Some may see a blog as only a nook-and-cranny in the vast dimensions of cyber space, lacking the tangibility and material preservation of a "real" thesis, and likely to be lost. I was able to create wormholes from the densely populated planets of Facebook and Blackboard so that many could travel Into the Sieve. And the blog welcomed cyber space voyagers from France, Chile, Puerto Rico, not to mention several states of America (and hopefully more to come!). And if their stay in what I "set down" was good, I find it less important to prove if it meets the qualifications of a "real" thesis or not. Perhaps it can be more than that. Perhaps it can be language-making.
No comments:
Post a Comment