Participants2
- Democracy VS Dictatorship
This subsection will be a short introduction about a subject that we will mention again later, and more in-depth.
Here is an article: the website isn’t available anymore, so put the pdf there?
(with the tool Coh-Metrix), in p.27, displays the capabilities of a tool to analyze words and the semantic, in order to better understand the relationship between the language as well as the way of speaking, and the intention behind: and in that case, it is with the aim of figuring politicians out.
We will look deeper into this article later; for now, it’s just to cast a quick glance at, to better grasp this idea of interrelation between what is said and what is received, without analyzing the tool itself.
You can maybe catch on that the article notices some details and draws some correlations between formal or informal language, and democracy or dictatorship : in other words, the analysis of the writing and way of speaking could lead us to some conclusions to better apprehend some overall situations.
And for the future journalists as you are, it could be useful for you to become aware of the responsibilities you have and on what you can reflect of yourself and your speech, sometimes despite yourself.
Because sometimes, you aren’t in a position to know the extent of your words.
That’s why, first, we’ll take a look at how to define the intention, before studying the weight of words.
Watch the sequence of The Dictator, directed by Charlie Chaplin in 1940, in the Powerpoint.
- Intention behind what we share
The intention is like a seed; a spark from which all the next is following, according to the orientation of its growth. It is the first thing that exists, before giving it a name, before being aware of it, and before of course, substantiating it.
The intention is the nerve centre, from which plenty of ramifications stretch out here and there, materializing themselves by thoughts, words, language, writing.
The intention is the deep message we want to spread, the values that matter to us.
In a democracy or dictatorship, before that their message was analysed, they had intention ; and they chose their own way to share this intention.
And because words, most of the time, slip from our control, and that they can be misread even if the intention behind is well-intentioned – precisely because the mental representation proper to each -, it is important, most of all, to think about our intention first and foremost, to be sure that it is in harmony with our values, chiming with ourselves, to know next how to transmit them the most properly as possible.
Because, whether you like it or not, words will go over what you really wanted to share, deeply. It is the purpose for the next and final subsection of the chapter.
- The weight of words, out of our control
Do you remember the principle of what is factual on a hand and what is utterly subjective and depends on the interpretation proper to each? We made an analogy between this principle and the way to receive an artistic work.
So, let’s pursue the analogy further. We agree that there are countless looks as well as numerous people. Let’s think again about the artistic work itself, conceptually speaking.
And take the example of a movie: you see a movie, and this movie will stay, as material and tangible “object” all this time the same – apart from technical problems like reels that would damage.
But can we say, despite that, that the film stops existing? If yes, that would mean that the end of the viewing would be the end of the film, doesn’t it?
This is an issue the Italian author Umberto Ecco asked himself in his book “The Open Work”, whose focus on the relationship between the lector and the book – and we can also say the spectator and the film – ; this lector embodying a kind of extension of the film/book, enabling it to still exist, and probably forever, by the simple fact of the lector/spectator’s interpretation/emotions/thoughts.
According to him, a film, a book, or whatever else, is an artistic work for discovering, over and over again : an open work that doesn’t evolve anymore as a tangible “object” or “shape”, but pursues its own existence because of us, spectator/lector, and maybe especially because of analysts, who watch/read it before analysing it, giving it a new breath constantly.
We make it become undying and perpetual, granting it a dimension that it didn’t imagine or even claim ; not even its creator.
This analogy highlighted is intended for making us understand how much most things can slip from our control and spread beyond our expectations. It is the case for Art, for work, ideas, projects. And it is also the case for words, from the most insignificant to the most relevant and meaningful.
In the extension of the remarks already mentioned above, about the Mental Representation proper to each and so the inherent influence of that, we can easily affirm that Words have weight, a weight that we don’t measure the most of time, but yet effective and influential.
And in that way, we have a huge responsibility for what we say, what we write, what we share. To our neighbour, to our friend, to the world, to ourselves. From this point of view, nothing is insignificant.
Note also, as a reminder, the non-official rule of “3I”, if you are sometimes doubting about the process to follow: first, the Intention you put before sharing anything at all, only depending on you and your values, secondly the Interpretation of it, depending on the Mental Representation proper to each, and thirdly, the Influence you’ll have, combination between Intention and Interpretation, sliping from the Intention control, making its own way.
These 3I are deeply linked, and if the first point to the scale (Intention) isn’t well defined, given that the following process is unpredictable and dependent on many other external factors, you can be sure that things might turn out wrongly, or at least far away from your values.
Now we have pointed out the consideration of the ambivalence behind the words : as it is semantically speaking, and as it is perceived and interpreted.
Passing by this step and assessment wasn’t anecdotal; it was even utterly necessary to put it in clear before getting to the heart of the matter – we’re ready to move things up a gear.
Please do the exercises explained in the task in the PowerPoint in question.
