Justin Bua

Justin Bua is featured at The Source this month. See the article and the slide show at http://www.thesource.com/articles/20250/Groundbreaking-and-Internationally-Known-Artist...Justin-Bua/.

It is great to see his work getting featured. I like how the article focuses on his work in design and advertising, in addition to his canvas work. Bua's work really brings a hip-hop sensibility to a wide range of visual arts. I hope that some art historians and other visual culture types begin looking at his work and considering how he blends realism and irony in his work. I think he fits within the post-soul aesthetic and he shares some traits with Kehinde Wiley, Kerry Marshall, and Ellen Gallagher.

The Allegory of the Cave Re-visited

One of the nice parts about being a college professor is that I get to re-read Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" every fall with my freshmen class. While the selection we read is fairly short (only about 7 pages), it remains such a provocative piece. I am looking forward to what the class has to say tomorrow.

What really struck me today is how Plato is both deeply committed to truth and the obligation to share that truth with your fellow citizens. This idea remains revolutionary (and such a popular metaphor) because it refuses to accept popular, easy, or conventional answers. Moreover, the Republic is anything but sentimental, romantic, or patriotic as it places truth and wisdom above a fake or illusory common sense consensus. I wonder how our factured poliltics would look (e.g. the Mosque controversy or the Glenn Beck rally) if folks really applied Plato's approach.

Do yourself a favor and re-read it!

Mosque Controversy

I have not really waded into the NYC mosque controversy because I don't really know all the facts. It does seem like there are a couple of potential critical thinking problems with the reasoning of those opposed to the mosque (This is not say that the other side is not making some of its own errors).

First, it seems like that many commentators and people are equating Al Queda with all Muslims. While Al Queda claims to be a Muslim group, a very small percentage (less than a percent) of Muslims are connected with Al Queda. In a related vein, many are confusing the fact that some (again a very small percentage) Muslims advocate for a version of Jihad that is defined by political and violent confrontations with the idea that ALL Muslims hold similar values. The Imam in the center of this controversy is a Sufi. I don't claim to know everything about this form of Islam but I do know that it is distinct from the Sunni, Shiite, and Wahabism. It seems like critics of the mosque out to demonstrate some familiarity with the immense variety of versions of Islam.

Second, it seems like many folks who oppose the mosque do so on the grounds that it is an affront to "American" values and the memory of the victims. From what I have read, 10% of those who died in the WTC disaster were Muslim. For some reason, their memory does not seem to part of this discussion. Also, it seems like somehow people are forgetting that Muslims can be "Americans." Again from what I have read somewhere between 2.5 and 8 million Muslims are live and are citizens of the U.S. On its face, it seems contradictory to somehow suggest that these folks do not possess "American" values.

Third, just because an individual - in this case Al Queda terrorists - does something, it does not necessarily follow that they did so for religious reasons. For example, just because Christians or Jews regularly commit murders, rapes, and thefts in the U.S., it does not follow that these individuals did so out of religious reasons. While Al Queda frequently relies on religious symbols and rhetoric, Al Queda is much more of a political organization than a religious one. Its leaders are not called imams because they are not really focused on religious per se but pursuing a particular political projecte (albeit a very dangerous and violent one).

Fourth, as the picture above notes, there are many other potentially more demeaning buildings and businesses around the WTC than this mosque. I am not sure how pubs, strip clubs, fast-food joints, and lingerie shops help memorize the victims of this tragedy. It seems a bit idiosyncratic to attack this mosque if you are not going at these other businesses as well.

Fifth, I keep hearing that the Imam has potential radical ties with and/or has not been critical enough of certain groups (e.g. Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood). After doing some web searching, I cannot imagine someone who has a greater history of inter-faith dialogue and a geniune connection to Lower Manhattan. Given his extensive political ties to both parties, he seems like precisely the kind of Islamic leader than many politicians have been asking for! I believe I read that he has led services for something like 20 years in that area. This is not some "fly by night" operation, nor does he appear to use this space to be anti-American or to some denigrate the memories of the WTC bombings. Things are not adding up for me here as I would think that some folks would like that "moderate Islam" is trying to challenge "radical Islam" and present a model for how to be good "Islamic Americans."

While there might be a debate about its location (Are four or ten blocks a better "buffer"than 2?), I guess I am having hard time to see any nuanced argument why a pretty moderate Muslim group shouldn't be able to build a community center in Lower Manhattan. The arguments against the mosque don't seem to add up, especially when I consider that much of this criticism has come from folks who tend to want the United States to endorse or support religion more frequently. Frankly,I would think most Americans would prefer a community center/house of worship there - no matter the religion - more than the New York Dolls Strip Club or an Off-Track Betting Site. (BTW, I believe there was a Dunkin' Donuts across the street or within 2 blocks from the Holocaust memorial in Berlin in 2006!)

I also think that the fact this Imam has held services there before and after the WTC attack - with little fanfare or controversy - leads me to believe that this controversy is probably more manufactured than anything else and more an artifact of other partisan debates in American culture than anything else.

Innovation and its Inverse Relation to Intellectual Property Law

A friend forwarded me an interesting article from Spiegel Online, which can be be found at http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,710976,00.html. It basically argues that German innovation exploded in the 19th century because its relative lack of copyright allowed ideas to flourish and grow, enabling its industrial revolution. The article contrasts Germany with Britain whose relatively strong copyright laws allowed printer monopolies caused books to cost more. If the author would have included the United States in his analysis, he would have likely noted how the American Industrial Revolution was highly dependent on that relative laxity of copyright and trademark in the young republic.

I also think there is something interesting here in relation to the Ipad, the kindle, and other e-book readers. I have wanted to buy one but I have hesitated because I am not sure which format will work best for my combination of scholarly, textbook, and pleasure reading. As content (i.e. books) gets cheaper, it seems like there is a greater corporate investment in intellectual property law regimes that confer monopolies to their owners. The result is that picking an e-reader limits your reading rather than unleashing it. It seems like the growth in I.P. law might be hindering the flourishing ideas. Of course, I am not the first person to oberve this. Nonetheless, I just keep seeing the negative effects of IP laws expansion!

Analysis and Application vs. Critical Thinking

Students, faculty, administrators, critics of higher education, and its proponents all seem to be questioning everything about higher education from its cost and public funding to the future of tenure and shift toward more professional majors. While many things underlie these debates, one unspoken issue is whether universities should be teaching students to become skilled in applying or analyzing a fairly narrow range of issues or problems that relate to a particular field (sometimes called a major) or become good communicators, critical thinkers, and engaged citizens (what Andrew Mills calls the swiss army approach to education - see http://faculty.otterbein.edu/Amills/MillsCollegeEssay.html).



Of course, by framing things in this way, I have created a false binary. The reality is more complex than this simplistic either/or. However, the public dialogue seems to also rely on this binary when approaching the question of the purpose of higher education, mostly because the graduates skilled in certain kinds of analysis or application possess identifiable and relatively easy to market skills.



Consider professional majors, such as accounting, architecture, or education. These majors claim to provide students with the ability to apply basic principles in those fields. While many folks have tried to get these fields to focus on communication, citizenship, and critical thinking, the meat and potatoes classes in these majors are focused on how to solve concrete problems facing practitioners and function as members of the profession. Moreover, based on what I have heard from my traditional-aged students is that they like this kind of "hands on" focus. To succeed in these programs, students need to learn how to analyze problems and how to apply. From my own experience in law school, developing the ability to "think like a lawyer" was probably the most difficult academic task I ever experienced and made graduate school relatively "easy" by comparision to law school.



Yet, this is not the same thing as becoming a critical thinker. A critical thinker goes beyond analysis or application and interrogates the existing categories, structures, paradigms, and procedures. (I don't want to rehash all the great stuff about critical thinking at criticalthinking.org/. Their stuff is great - you should check it out). A critical thinker respects the immense value of being able to apply a concept or engage in a specific kind of analysis, but also explores the limits of a given paradigm or approach. Critical thinking considers the approach's assumptions and consequences. It looks for what gets omitted or neglected. It also asks questions about who benefits from the standard approach.



My own journey to a Ph.D. in American Studies, I think, reflects my allegiance to a broad area of inquiry over a specific disciplinary allegiance. In other words, by choosing an interdisciplinary program, I explicitly rejected the idea that only one method, discipline, or paradigm can produce adequate knowledge. For better or worse, this has left me a "jack of many trades but master of none." I realize that not everyone shares my assumptions or my values, so I hesitate to foist it upon the masses.



That being said, I find it odd that many partisans in the debates about higher education want higher education to become an either/or kind of place where students either analysis/application or critical thinking. From my point of view, the application/analysis seems to be winning this debate, but I think at a huge cost. I am not sure that we can afford to focus only analysts or folks specializing in application. On the other hand, focusing on critical thinking or citizenship without some sort of specialized skill or knowledge does not produce the kind of creativity, entreprenurial sprirt, or engage citizens we need. It seems like we need to create institutions of higher education that can do both and do both well.

For students, I think this means coming to grips with the fact that college is both about learning employable skills and the awareness about their limitations and/or flaws. As I tell my students, high school is about identifying the difference between "black" and "white," while college is about navigativing in the "grey area."

For professors, administrators, and pundits, embracing the difference between analysis and critical thinking and valuing both is probably the only way to strengthen our institutions and help students achieve their goals.

Pleasure Reading vs. Academic Reading

The beginning of the new school year is almost upon us. So, I thought it might be useful to remind students and colleagues that not all reading is the same.

Reading for pleasure is not the same thing as reading for learning, intellectual development, critical thinking, and/or application. For most folks, pleasure reading is defined by enjoying a plot, identifying the main character or (in the case of non-fiction) learning some cool facts. Pleasure reading rarely entails note-taking or even doing anything with the text other than stacking on a shelf.

Academic or professional reading is different. First off, you need to determine the expertise of the writer, the book's likely audience, and the nature of the book (is it a romance novel or a scholarly treatise?). Next, you need to identify the book's goals, its topic, its main thesis, and its general structure. Once you have a good overview of the book, then you need to evaluate the evidence (how was it collected and evaluated), analyze the writing quality, identify the writer's assumptions, and consider if the evidence and the assumptions support the general conclusion. You also might need to look at how the ideas developed and how the author relies on tradition.

To get the most out of an academic or professional text, most folks need to take notes, highlight key passages, jot down how to apply an idea to an example, note important phrases or quotations, and even identify places where you have questions for the author and/or disagree with him/her. There are a range of academic books and a similar range of goals when reading academic/professional books. You may need to evaluate the idea it presents or apply the idea to future examples or cases. For many humanities classes, evaluating an idea is a key skill. For social science, natural science, and professional courses, much time is spent on learning to apply concepts and skills to the field.

Whether reading a philosophical treatise or textbook on accounting, students will need to "read with a pen" and highlight key parts of the text by putting them in your own words. Increasingly, I am encouraging students to "brief" readings or learn how to summarize them in a page for future use. No matter one's job or profession, one will need to keep updated on the literature and it will be crucial to possess the reading skills to get and apply new concepts and facts. Teachers focus on reading because it is a key way to develop the intellectual, analytical, and critical thinking skills and habits students will need once they leave the university.

The longer I am involved in teaching the more I think that we need to develop a new word to describe academic or professional reading. The lack of specificity makes what we do in education unclear and confuses folks about what we are asking our students to do. Moreover, it breaks the link between reading the kinds of habits of mind we are trying to foster among our students. Academic or professional reading is not the idle passing of eyes over words but engaging in critical and analytical thought.

By differentiating between pleasure and academic/professional reading, students and their professors are more likely to meet their goals this semester.

Regional vs. National Tastes in Hip-hop

I have spent the summer reading a few books on Southern Hip-Hop, including Roni Sarig's Third Coast and Ali Neff's Let the World Listen Right. Last spring, I got a chance to read some books about West Coast style too. One thing that comes out in those books is the intense regionality of hip-hop and how local sounds shaped artists in particular places. None of this will be surprising to hip-hop fans. It is interesting to see how scholars and writers mimic this regional debate as Sarig and Neff spend considerable time defending Southern hip-hop to show that hip-hop has always been deeply connected to the South via rapping and other vernacular practices and how crunk has come to dominate hip-hop in the last decade.

My own journey in hip-hop started out pretty traditionally with an East Coast bias in the 1980s and 1990s (while living in Chicago) and then slowly shifting toward a more academic approach as my research into hip-hop required me to listen more broadly than ever before. While hip-hop itself has "always" been a way for folks to articulate regional/local identities, I realize that this has not been my situation or my interaction with hip-hop. Listening to hip-hop has never been a local or regional affair for me. As a result, I guess I am less interested in reading or arguing about the origins of hip-hop or deciding which region is more authentic or better. Rather, I am curious about how scholars can usefully approach these dividing lines. The first waves of hip-hop scholarship has been intensely local, defending regions, artists, and labels.

I am wondering if Jazz studies and the competing claims of New Orleans, KC, Oklahoma City, Harlem, Chicago, and later LA. in regards to jazz will prove a useful analogy for hip-hop studies. From my vantage point, it seems like Jazz has transcended some of its original regionality as the music became less popular and the audience aged. What happens to hip-hop and hip-hop studies when the historical, cultural, and socio-economic forces that shaped it no longer hold? What will happen to the regional lens we currently use to view hip-hop? By the end of Sarig's book, for example, the artists of some locations - particularly Virginia Beach - move around so much that I am not sure how regional the music remains. The same could be said for the journey began in Atlanta by Outkast, Goodie Mob, and other folks from the ATL. Is regionality an essential feature of hip-hop or something that will go the way of Adidas shoes and Kangol hats?

What Music Goes Best with 100 Degree Heat?

After walking/jogging 3.5 miles in the 100 degree Missouri heat and humidity, I have determined the following artists work well in the heat and humidity:

• Aceyalone
• Aesop Rock
• Blitz the Ambassador
• Jason Moran
• Steely Dan
• Immortal Technique
• Shy D

I am only luke-warm (sorry for the pun) about the following artists:

• Dinosaur Jr.
• Van Morrison
• Barry White
• Indie Arie
• Brother Ali
• Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five

These artists CANNOT handle the heat and the humidity:

• Bruce Springsteen
• Talking Heads
• Kanye West
• Red Garland
• Wynton Kelly
• Jeff Watts

Don't say I did not warn you!