Drawing on a Freudian notion of primary identification, the philosopher Stiegler directs his focus to the influence a cultural commodity can have on young people.
This process of identification is precisely what the contemporary culture industry subverts, in diverting and capturing the attention of young minds in their time of “brain availability” (Stiegler, 2010: 4 original emphasis).
Although Stiegler constructs young people as passive recipients of culture, Willis, suggests that school students, albeit with a focus on those of lower working class, mobilise the goods of popular culture as acts of resistance against school activities by suggesting that:
…a cultural expression through commodities may supply an instant social and cultural imaginary for resistance and alternatives to the felt oppression of the school, providing, so to speak, something to resist “with”. […] From this position they are likely to be inclined to exploit popular culture and other resources to embody their resistance or dissatisfaction with other status markers, mobilizing cultural “positioning goods” that they can control (Willis, 2003: 406-407 original emphasis).
Willis’s reference to ‘positioning goods’ reverts back to Stiegler’s point. Although Stiegler considers that the direction of power stems outward from the culture industry and its
commodification of products that are aimed at a youth market, Willis picks this up and in extending it, suggests that as these become symbolic in their ‘positioning’ state they are then significant in displaying to others that the individual has a level of identification with what it is that they signify. The recognition of this is then used as a means of exerting some level of control in certain situations where this is deemed as needy. In this case young people use some commodities in a way that signifies their resistance to aspects of education. The implication is that if these goods, which are aimed at a sector of society by the ‘culture industry’ are not already subverted then the significance of the resistance is muted. Therefore the control of them in this way is double edged, in that others can initially direct their symbolism and meaning; therefore, they are taken up by those who they are aimed at in a state of readiness.
Students’ resistance to education in this way is enacted through cultural objects that through their commodification become artefacts of youth cultures and activities. These can be mobile phones,
portable music players, a website or even a magazine or other non-digital object. This offers an indication as to why some students might draw on the use of social and entertainment technologies while being in computer-resourced classrooms and Willis frames this point:
I argue that a social understanding of education needs to consider both top-down practices and bottom-up responses, and the ways that they interact “on the ground” to produce complex eddies, waves, and flows of modernization (Willis, 2003: 391).
Willis’s theme is by no means a recent phenomenon, as there have always been students that have engaged with education less than others regardless of the environment. His reference to ‘on the ground’ can easily be imagined as the classroom as the significant and discrete place where education and students directly come together.
Digital technologies, whether they are personal and portable, or those of education when used covertly offer a new form of opportunities for a diversion away from studies in the classroom. Therefore, to move beyond any theoretical propositions there is a clear need for research into what prompts these actions, even if it is simply the rationale of: I can do this, so I will. Although that proposition still prompts questions of what triggers the thought and the making of that decision. Willis focuses on students’ use of ‘positioning goods’ that have a symbolic relevance. In a computer-resourced classroom the computer is already there, and as an object it will not be dissimilar to students’ personal computers, although any symbolic application will be determined by function and what can be accessed through the technologies rather than any outward appearance.
In day-to-day life the fluidity of movement between actual and virtual spaces and places is afforded with equal ease through an ever increasing range of new digital technologies whether they are portable or situated, depending on the timeliness of the needs and values. Although increasingly this can undermine any previous conventions in a social, or professional situation when the digital takes precedence (see Ling, 2008: 1). To illustrate this I will draw on an example in a setting loaded with social and behavioural norms. Whilst in a conference centre library in April 2011, over two days I heard a number of library users hold conversations on their mobile phones that were so audible it was unavoidable not to hear them. In one instance I could clearly hear someone give out their personal contact and financial details to the person at the other end of the phone connection that they were having the conversation with. This was an international practice, as the languages ranged from English to Eastern European, Asian and Russian. Clearly, any consideration to the conventions of libraries as quiet areas was not considered, as was the thought that others could
overhear. As Greenfield (2008) suggests, technology has the potential to cocoon us from our immediate surroundings. With these changes in behaviour, regardless of context, there is some indication, why, if students engage with technologies for non-educational use they may become so absorbed they can partially suspend their coursework activities.
Earlier educational research (Barbour, 2005) identified some FE students were using their mobile phones and accessing social networks on their computers in the classroom in ways that resembled ritualistic traits. They appeared to have a continual need to digitally communicate with friends, or play digital games. Rituals, taken in this context, can be both individual and cultural:
Rituals tend to involve precise spatial arrays and symmetrical patterns, stereotyped actions, repetitive sequences, rigidly scrupulous adherence to rules (and often the constant creation of new rules) (Dulaney and Fiske, 1994: 245).
Young people’s attachment to their mobile phone has been likened to these portable technological objects functioning as a protective talisman (Moore, 2009), which is distinct from the excessive rituals of an obsessive-compulsive disorder, as this behaviour appears more culturally significant.
The participant in a culturally meaningful ritual is neither compulsive nor obsessive, because the ritual is an intentionally adopted and appropriate means to carry out some culturally intelligible goal (Dulaney and Fiske, 1994: 247).
McGuigan (2006) situates rituals as cultural acts, adding, similarly to Willis (2003), that young people are adept at reappropriating the commodities of a capitalist culture in a ritualistic behaviour to signify their resistance to the dominant culture. Depending on the commodity it can function as a carrier of cultural codes with meanings greater than any rituals that are more habits, or routines (McLaren 1999: 41-42). Ling (2008) considers that there is an ontological security gained from ritualistic action. In some cultures rituals can also be an indicator of being in a liminal state, and the ritualist action signifies a state of getting prepared (Van Gennep, 1960) for something other than before. Turner (1969: 95), likewise suggests rituals are acts signifying a state of ‘betwixt and between’.
Accessing Facebook, or other social platforms through a classroom computer to respond to messages could be conceived as a social imperative, but also an illustration of how technologies have become so embedded within youth cultures. Away from college a networked computer performs a social and leisure function and therefore is symbolically loaded with value. Stiegler (2010: 94) argues that ‘new media leads directly to the hypersocialisation of attention’.
Consequently, if classroom activities or conditions are lacking that value can become persuasive through a need for something more stimulating to new forms of attention.
What arises from this situation is the perception that technologies can be repurposed due to the ways that they can offer a means of diversion away from course activities and learning. Consequently the computer-resourced classroom can become a place where the official and unofficial affordances of technologies at times vie for attention depending on the user and the circumstances.