I flipped through a few stacks of projects, looking for topics that I could in some way garner some wisdom from. There weren't many that had topics that I could see myself writing anything similar too. Lots of SD, etc.
I found one by Annah Nesbitt, I think, that I read in full. And to be honest it wasn't "so great" to use Derek's terminology. Her paper was written on the commoditization of Che Guevara, and how that has manipulated his image into something that he would be appalled with.
I agreed with the title, and it was a good one. It was frank, and kinda informal, I think it said "You know revolution and all that..." She was referring to the response that one gets when asking some random teenager what Che meant. So her title was great. But her basis for writing the paper was an encounter she had with her little brother, one of those teenagers. Not only did she go into why she chose the topic in too much detail, but the paper itself wasn't what I expected from the title. She ended up writing a biography, and tying in a little bit of theory of why Che was such a good symbol.
She could have written about the "evils of capitalism" or the convenient way Che and his ideas have been pushed out of history books and onto t-shirts instead, but she just fell a little short.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
That is a shame Mr. McCaully that such a promising topic would turn so plain, and (shudder) autobiographical. The incredible strength of the capitalist system we dwell is its sheer capacity for absorption, like the Borg in Star Trek. Throw any idea, movement, or concept at the capitalist mode of production, no matter how contrary those ideas are to the system itself, and it will happily regurgitate them for a hefty profit. There is always a market for rebellious attitudes :)
Post a Comment