The Object, the Question, & the Lens By Theresa Senft I ... - Terri Senft

Class Title: Writing II Catalogue Number:
Semester: Spring Academic Year: 2011-­‐2012
Instructor: Theresa (Terri) Senft Instructor’s Email: terri.senft@nyu.edu
The Object, the Question, & the Lens
By Theresa Senft
I consider the following to be the fundamental elements of a strong cultural studies
paper:
• The object
• The question
• The lens
First, the disclaimer: If you know me, you know that I don't think this
object/question/lens business is some big universal truth of good analytical writing.
You also need to know that I more or less made up these terms, based on conversations
with teachers, colleagues and editors over the years. If anyone is reading this and thinks
I should give them credit for this terminology, I'm happy to. Just drop me a line.
I'm not a big fan of driving without a road map, so unless you can persuade me that
you have a better plan for constructing your paper, we will be going the
object/question/lens route. Fair enough? Below, I explain what I mean when I speak
about the object.
PART 1: THE OBJECT
What is an “object”?
By "object" I mean the topic you wish to write about. In general, an object (which is
in other courses called a "text") can be EITHER a specific finished product (such as
a painting, book, film or musical recording, or television commercial) OR a social
phenomenon (such as the use of "heroin chic" in the fashion industry, the rise of
caller id in private homes, or the rise in "blue screen" acting techniques
OPTION 1: "I want to talk about how messed up the advertising industry is." For our
purposes, this is too broad an object.
OPTION 2: "I want to talk about how it seems that people are always encouraged to be
thin in advertising." This is okay, but still needs refining.
OPTION 3: "I want to talk about this time when I was working at a modelling agency and
I witnessed my bosses picking models for a specific shoot based on whether they could see
the models' ribcages through their shirts. Option 3, in my opinion, is a nicely sized
1

object for a paper. Can you see why this would be?
Regarding the importance of narrative and your object.
Though there are many exceptions to this rule, most essays require a beginning,
middle and end. Consider the following:
Option A: "I want to talk about my internal debate over getting caller ID"
Option B: "I want to talk about how my housemates began screening calls once we got
caller ID installed"
Option C: "I want to talk about caller ID as a dehumanizing phenomenon."
In this case, I would suggest that Options A and B are "strong objects" for us,
whereas Option C is weaker. Why? Because the "personal" examples have a logical
trajectory (i.e. "before caller id, after caller id, my thoughts about the phenomenon
of caller id") than the "universal" example. Also, options A and B will naturally
lead to a discussion of larger social questions.
Please note that I'm NOT saying you can't write in the style of Option C. It is just
more difficult to do so. Contrary to what many expository writing teachers believe,
I think it's troublesome to begin with some huge statement and "shrink down" to
the particular. To begin an essay with the statement "Technology X is
dehumanizing" begs too many questions, from "Dehumanizing for whom?" to
"Who are you to decide what constitutes a 'human' approach?” If you simply
MUST write in the style of Option C, I am going to ask you to confer with me first,
to avoid pitfalls.
On situating your narrator vis a vis your object.
Earlier I mentioned when it came to object size, I preferred Option 3, above. That’s
the one where someone wrote, "I want to talk about this time when I was working at a
modelling agency and I witnessed my bosses picking models for a specific shoot based on
whether they could see the models' ribcages through their shirts.
You know what else is good about option 3? It nicely situates the narrator of the
paper. In the case of Option 3, we know the speaker isn't some Grand Authority;
rather, he's the employee of the advertising agency. This is going to affect his
perspective, of course. Also important: a writer may have multiple roles in the
stories they tell, and this matters hugely.
For instance, in Option 3, we know the person is an employee, but he may also be
a student, an aspiring model himself, etc. All of these roles are going to affect what
he sees in his analysis, and what he does not. When you choose your object, you
are going to have to state and explore your position, as well. Again, this is why I
think stories are useful. Stories often include your position as the narrator, and destabilize
the notion of you as The Authority. When you begin with a personal
story, you are taking the rhetorical position not of the Expert, but of the individual
with an incident to share.
2

(Please note: Some will argue that there are HUGE problems with the lie of the
"ordinary person with an ordinary story" routine. The biggest problem critics have
with this is that the "ordinary person" IS declaring him/herself an expert, just by
the ACT writing on a topic. And what's more, s/he protects him/herself in a way
an expert cannot: that is, by hiding behind the cover of "hey, I'm just an ordinary
person." If you want to see this in action, check out Rush Limbaugh, for instance,
or pretty much any moron on AM radio.
I agree with this critique. Still, for our purposes, I still think the "ordinary person"
approach is the way to go, particularly since we WILL be interrogating our own
perspectives vis a vis our "question", which I will discuss in a moment.
Regarding the size of your object
As a general rule of thumb, the smaller the object, the more controllable your
paper will be. Consider the following options and our comments, below:
OPTION 1: "I want to talk about how dangerous surveillance is."
OUR COMMENT: For our purposes, this is too broad an
object for a paper.
OPTION 2: "I want to talk about the government gets more and more
information about us every day.”
OUR COMMENT: This is okay, but still needs refining.
OPTION 3: "I want to talk about how the New York City Metrocard can be
used to track people, and asking whether we want our
government to be monitoring its citizens in that way.”
OUR COMMENT: Option 3 is a nicely sized object for a
paper. Can you see why this would be?
When you have more than one object: Comparing and Contrasting
Sometimes, it is helpful to write a paper using not one object, but two, or even three
objects in a similar category. “Compare and contrast” is a common technique in
cultural studies. When you compare and contrast two objects, you are asking two
straightforward questions:
• What do these two things have in common? This is generally a matter of
explanation and listing (i.e. both are video games, both came as a result of a
corporate merger, etc.)
• How do these two things differ? Because they are about mechanics (‘how”)
differences between your objects should take MORE of your time to explain than
similarities. Now, the truth is, two objects can have an endless number of
similarities and differences. To determine the ones you want to focus on, we
need to discuss your question. That’s covered in the next task.
3

PART 2: YOUR QUESTION
The Question
After you locate your object, you'll want to come up with your question. For many
of you, your question and your object will be intimately connected. For others,
teasing out your question may take some work.
The "question" portion of your essay strategy is most easily dealt with by asking
yourself, "What about my object fascinates me? How can I formulate my
fascination as a one or two line interrogation?"
Helpful advice regarding questions
• Use words like “how” or “what” rather than “why” to form your questions.
Asking “why” generally yields the answer, “because,” which gets you nowhere as
a researcher.
• Realize that you won’t have room to tackle more than one question in a short
paper. That said, you will --and should-- have ancillary or
“follow up” questions coming from your big question.
• State your questions as concisely and clearly as possible. This means that
two short sentences are better than one long one.
• Avoid leading questions. For example, “How does the Internet lead to the
collapse of communication?” is an argument masquerading as a question, and is
not acceptable for a proposal.
Some Common Types of Questions
Below, we provide four categories of common questions asked in media and
cultural studies. This list is by NO MEANS EXHAUSTIVE. It is meant to spark
your thinking, nothing more. Here are some things you might want to ask of
your objects:
Questions of PLACE AND SPACE
1. In what place does my object exist? Where in history, geography, and cultural
memory is it located? How does the arrangement of space affect the object’s
meaning within culture? Has that space changed over time? What might be the
signifcance of that change for culture at large?
2. How do the particular social groups I am studying come to an understanding of
their private and the public space? Their commercial and ‘free’ space? Their
sacred and the secular space?
4

Questions of AFFECT and MEMORY
1. What sorts of experiences does my object illicit for its
viewers/participants/bystanders/participants? How does experiential
knowledge change what an object ‘means’ for different populations?
2. What is the relationship between an experience of a moment, and the re-telling of
it via memory?
Questions of IDENTITY and COMMUNITY
1. How have issues of gender, class, nationality, religion, race, age, ability, or
language use functioned in the past for the group of people I’m interested in
studying? Have there been changes worth noting? What might those changes
signify regarding culture at large?
2. How was legitimate and illegitimate behavior determined in the past for those in
the group I am studying? Have their been changes worth noting? How might
those changes tell us something about the changing nature of the group, or about
culture at large?
Questions of PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION
1. Who has owned the means to produce this practice/product/tool in the past? Do
different people own it now? If so, have changes in ownership affected what this
practice/product/tool signifies culturally?
2. Who has used this practice/product/tool in the past? Do different people use it
now? If so, have changes in consumption affected the cultural meanings of this
practice/product/tool?
PART 3: YOUR LENS (ES)
The Lens
After the object and the question, the lens is our final element of paper
preparation. The "lens", as I define it, is your demonstration that you know whom
else is thinking in your field. I liked Taylor's description of the lens very much. She
wrote:
If the object is the thing/issue/problem that you want to investigate, then the lens is the
medium through which you choose to view your object, i.e. what theories, etc. "
Consider this: your friend calls herself an innovator, and in a bar she tells you
about her latest cool invention: a disk on which you play music. But when you tell
her that the CD has been in production a decade now, she looks baffled, and then
starts talking about how she "can't be expected to know everything." How weird
would that be?
5

Whatever thoughts we are having on any topic, the chances are darn good that
somebody else, probably somebody smarter than us, has been thinking about them
somewhere else. It's your job to find those folks, and converse with AT LEAST
ONE of them in your paper. By converse, I don't mean ring the poor people up. I
mean dialogue with their ideas.
Finding your Lens
Remember, anybody smart can have a thought. The difference between a random
smart person and a scholar is that a scholar is responsible for knowing WHO ELSE
is thinking along the same lines they are.
For your Writing 1 papers, I’ve given you at least two possible theorists to use as
lenses. Later on, your professors will want you to begin searching for lenses on
your own. Sometimes, it's hard to know where to begin to look for experts on the
topic you want to investigate, but that is something you will tackle in Writing 2.
Remember…
Your choice of lens will PROFOUNDLY AFFECT how you see your object. For
instance, Edward Said (famous pro-Palestinean scholar) would write about the
recent shooting we discussed with a very different lens than would a Pro-Israeli
journalist. Different still might be a recently widowed mother from the West Bank
who just wants all fighting to stop. All of these "authorities" can be found by doing
a web search on the incident in question. All of them give vastly different readings
of the same reality. This is something we will discuss together in our private
meetings. I just wanted to give you a "heads up."
To summarize
The "lens", as I define it, is your demonstration that you know whom else is
thinking in your field. Once you find at least ONE person to dialogue with in your
paper on your topic, you safely can say you have your "lens" established.
Remember, you don't need to know everything written about your interests, but you do
need to know *something* beyond your own thoughts.
Now that you are familiar with the concepts of the object, the question and the lens, you
are ready to go on to “Writing a cultural studies paper in four easy pieces.”
6