Analysis: Some Burning Questions
Written on Monday, March 10, 2014 by Unknown
Having a thesis blog is really cool. And very exciting because it's new and different. I love it.
[via undergrad.osu.edu]
Legendary, huh? Well then. I guess I need one more gif to round this out...
BAM. Blogging. It's legen-waitforit-dary.
But there are some occasional drawbacks.
One drawback is the fact that I do not write sections and then turn in draft after draft to my advisor for editing/revising until it is perfect. I just write it, post it, and hope I don't screw up. That isn't to say I don't edit after I hit "Publish," but I can't make any huge changes without completely changing a post, which kind of defeats the purpose of it being available instantaneously. So I only edit for clarity and accuracy, and no changes are that huge or noticeable to anyone other than myself.
So what does this have to do with my analysis section? A lot actually. Because I can't turn in drafts, I will have to work out a lot of this online. This means that not all of my posts will be perfect and sometimes it could just be me being confused about stuff. Like right now. But the only way to reach any kind of conclusion is to ask a lot of questions.
First question: How do I analyze transmedia that is all over the place? (Actually, how do I analyze transmedia at all?)
This is a rhetoric thesis so I need to be looking at things as a rhetorical critic. My advisor suggested the concept of kernels and satellites. I was somewhat familiar with this concept already, but after reading an article called Re(de)fining Narrative Events: Examining Television and Narrative Structure (see Bibliography for citation), I decided I liked the concept a lot and wanted to use it. For those who have no idea what kernels and satellites are, I made a video. But if you won't click that then here is the most basic definition I can give. Kernels are the parts of a story that move it along, and the story wouldn't make sense if you removed them. Satellites are the parts of the story that add dimension, but can be removed while the story stays intact. Okay? Okay.
And that is all great. A little vague, but the article I read adds more specific criteria which makes it easier to identify kernel and satellite scenes (which they call The Scene Function Model). But this theory is meant for television. Not for a webseries that incorporates social media. How the hell do I categorize what is and is not important and why, when there are waaaaay too many outlets to look at? I was making a timeline (but luckily I found this better one) and I found that I could look at the show in a variety of different ways. What if Lizzie's videos are the kernel of the series and the spin-offs (i.e. Lydia, Maria, Domino) are all satellites? Or maybe only some of Lizzie's videos are kernels. Or maybe the videos are all kernels and the extra stuff (twitter, facebook, pinterest) is all satellites. What do I separate? Do I separate? What do I look at? What is important? There are just too many factors. I can barely keep any of it straight.
This leads me to my second question...
To book or not to book?
Continued in part 2.
-Danny
What does it mean "to book or not to book"? I think this is some webseries lingo/computer thing I know not of. Enlighten me :)
And, not only should you think of the various outlets as potential kernels/satellites but if a particular plot line is a kernel, where is that "written" in the world of transmedia? Are they exclusively/primarily developed in the web shows? I think for LIzzy -- yes? Just thoughts.
It doesn't mean anything. I was just being silly and trying to segue into the question about whether or not to use the book when analyzing.
I think you're right, they are primarily developed in the web show and the other social media stuff is secondary.
And what exactly do you mean by "written"?