Saturday, August 11, 2012

The Lack of Video Captions

Update: it looks like Coursera is now taking the video captions seriously; almost all of the videos now posted have captions. Strangely, there is no announcement on the homepage to let us know about that. I found out just by accident. The latest announcement on the homepage as of August 26 is an announcement dated August 14.

~

As I mentioned in my earlier post about course communication problems, people have been complaining - to no avail - about the lack of video captions for the latest videos. During the first week, when we were reading the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm, transcripts were very helpfully supplied for the numerous videos. Then, starting in Week 2 - Alice, there were no transcripts (although for one "extra" video about the Week 2 content, a transcript did appear this morning, oddly enough), and there is no transcript for the first video for Week 3 - Dracula, the one we are supposed to watch before we start reading for Week 3 (reading that people are doing this weekend, presumably).

As a result of the missing transcripts, people have been making requests at the discussion forums - I've seen requests from deaf and hard-of-hearing students, and also from many non-native speakers of English who find the transcripts essential in being able to follow what the professor is saying accurately. I'm someone who would like the transcripts just for sheer convenience; it is faster, easier and more accurate for me to access the information in text form. I really don't have time to listen to all the videos and, just as a general rule, I would prefer to read.

So, the complete lack of a response from the Coursera staff for the course got me curious about this. I remembered that the contract between Coursera and Michigan had been leaked and reprinted at the Chronicle of Higher Ed. I figured ADA had to be discussed in there, and sure enough it is. Here is what it says about transcripts/captions for videos:

Company will provide an "Audio Text Transcript" for the audio stream (i.e. captions), as follows:
  • For all University Courses offered to the public under the Coursera Monetization Model whose initial enrollment is above 10,000 End Users, the audio will be proactively captioned within seven days of the time that the Instructor uploads the video onto the Website.
  • For all University Courses offered to the public under the Coursera Monetization Model whose initial enrollment is fewer than 10,000, the audio will be captioned upon the request of an End User, who has a disability, in a timely manner, as specified below.
  • For any University Courses under the University Monetization Model or the Registered Students Model for which University requests such captions, at an agreed-upon fee.
For the people who are under the impression that Coursera is some kind of charity because we are not charged a fee for this course, think again: reading through this contract is a great reminder that they are very much a business venture. We are operating, I believe, under the "Coursera Monetization Model" - and I think that our enrollment is surely over 10,000 for this class (even though not all enrolled students are turning in written assignments). So, based on this contract, I would assume that we should be seeing transcripts within one week from the date when the video is uploaded. That does not seem to be the case, though, because the "Alice: Before You Read" video was uploaded on Thursday, August 2, and there is still no transcript for it (and we are now completely done with the Alice material, of course, having moved on to Dracula). Based on what I understand about this contract (don't quote me, though - eegad, lawyer-ese is hard to understand), that means we should have had the "Alice: Before You Read" audio transcript by now.

Worse, though, is that the one-week delay allowed for in the contract is really not feasible for this class. If the "before you read" video is released only on Thursday, and our writing assignment is due on the subsequent Tuesday, five days later, that means deaf students who are dependent on the video captions will not be able to access the "before you read" video before they do the reading and writing assignments for the unit.

One of the reasons I am not interested in developing video materials for my own courses is exactly because of the time-consuming need to supply a transcript - it's faster and easier for me to supply the content to the students in written form which does not have the same accessibility problems. I know that video appeals to a lot of people, of course... and if Coursera is committed to the use of video, as they are, then this question of timely availability of transcripts is a very important issue for them to resolve. Even if they did follow the terms of the contract and supplied the transcripts one week after the video is made available to the students, the deaf students in this class would not be getting the video transcripts - esp. the "before you read" video - in time to access that video before they do the week's reading.

Crystal Gazing, by Northcote Thomas

WOW - I have found a truly fascinating book to read at GoogleBooks - it is leading me farther and farther away from Dracula, so I probably won't post any notes from this book here, but I will share the link for anyone else who finds this kind of stuff to be of interest. I'm going to curl up for an hour or so and just read through this book. Andrew Lang: that man had such a wide-ranging set of folklore interests. I would love to sit down and have coffee with him in some supernatural cafe!

Crystal Gazing, its History and Practice by Northcote W. Thomas, with an introduction by Andrew Lang. Published in 1905. Online at GoogleBooks.

Table of Contents
I Superstition and Incredulity
II Vision and Visions
III Crystal Visions
IV The Speculum
V Historical
VI More Historical
VII The Incantation or Call
VIII Egyptian Scrying
IX More Egyptian Scrying
X Prophetic and Telepathic Scrying
XI Evidential Cases

Happy reading, everybody!


Mirror Myths: Medusa and Basilisk

So, after a dutiful look at some literary theory about vampires and mirrors (I mean, it was Lacan, right? I did my duty!), here are some more rambling thoughts about mirrors and folklore that in my mind are interesting intersections with Stoker's Dracula.

Let's start with the Greeks. Two thoughts come to mind:

Medusa. Remember Medusa? (Theoi.com is a good source to refresh your knowledge.) She was the monster with the snakes for hair whose gaze was deadly (and who surely is part of the inspiration for the super-fabulous weeping angels of Doctor Who). So, how can a hero ever hope to defeat Medusa if merely looking at her will get you killed? You use the power of a mirror to defeat her! Perseus was able to slay Medusa because he guided his deadly sword by looking at Medusa as reflected in his shield (a gift from Athena); he beheaded Medusa and then used her head as a weapon in turn; the deadly power of her gaze persisted even after death. Poor Perseus: imagine if he had to battle Dracula - he could not use the power of the mirror to avoid Dracula's gaze, ha ha. And we know there is something funky going on with the power of Dracula's gaze - he has those WEIRD RED EYES. There are also numerous references to the power of the evil eye in Stoker's novel (cue eerie music…).

Basilisk. Medusa was not the only one with a deadly gaze in Greek mythology; the basilisk was also able to kill with a look and had to be defeated with a mirror, because you could cast the basilisk's own gaze against itself. Thanks to Hermione Granger and Harry Potter, this is an old myth that has taken on new life! Here is a wonderful illustration from a 1501 edition of Aesop's fables which also contains all kinds of animal legends from the bestiary tradition, beyond just the canon of fables - and you can see here a knight with his shield mirror, turning the gaze of the basilisk back upon itself! (The weasel is also making a frontal attack, biting the basilisk on the foot; the accompanying poem is about a weasel, reflecting the basilisk-and-weasel legend from the bestiary tradition; full page here). Now, I have always personally suspected a cross-influence in Greek between the scientific etymology of basilisk meaning "royal, kingly" (from basileus, king; hence the regulus snake in Latin) and the word for the evil eye in Greek, baskanon (compare Latin fascinum, English fascinate, etc.), which is a sound-alike word. We'll never know, of course... but I imagine if I had been an ancient Greek person obsessing about the evil eye (as they did), then I would definitely have felt a connection. :-)

Allegories of Vampire Cinema, by Jeremy Magnan

So, I am going to give myself a couple of hours this luxurious Saturday morning to learn something about the folklore of mirrors, and the folklore of mirrors and vampires in particular. It's not something I have ever looked at systematically (vampires have actually never been a real interest of mine, but I loved this novel by Stoker!), so I will have lots of learn.

I start with Google… but I know better than to just search for "vampires mirrors" - the sheer abundance of fan fiction and fakelore on the Internet is a bad problem in general, and I suspect for vampires it is especially bad. So I am going to search for "vampires mirrors site:edu" to see what I can turn up at university websites; maybe I will get some conference papers, materials from courses, etc. Yep, lots of results. And the first result is an article that is so darn interesting that I am going to devote a whole post to it here.

ALLEGORIES OF VAMPIRE CINEMA by Jeremy Magnan - online here - downloadable PDF.

This is an article focused on film, so it doesn't really get at the folklore angle, but the mirror motif in vampire films is definitely something I would like to know about! (I have not seen any of the vampire movies.) The author brings in material from three dozen vampire films, so this will be worth skimming at least. The author's focus is a "reader-response" approach, looking at parallels between vampires and victims / vampires and spectators.  Intriguing; one of the things I liked most about Stoker's book was how the Count is really repulsive; the really powerful seductive effects are more focused on the his three female sidekicks (but of course the gender questions in this novel are just huge... I wish we had Mary Shelley's take on vampires, ha ha). Anyway, the idea of spectators and spectating is one that is really fascinating to me, so I am going to plunge into this article with a lot of questions… ooooh, and the questions are well worth it. This is a good article I see as I get into it.

Lacan's mirror stage is invoked as a theoretical model, and sure enough, the author asks what Dracula's "mirror stage" would be. He then invokes another scholar, Fiona Peters, who says "Vampires have no need for an unconscious - nor can they be seen in mirrors because they do not need to rely on the process of identifications that Lacan describes; in other words, they have not become formed as human subjects." YES - that is very much the feeling I was getting from Stoker (sans Lacan). The author then invokes a HILARIOUS quote from Slavoj Zizek: "It is therefore clear why vampires are invisible to the mirror: because they have read Lacan and, consequently, know how to behave." HA: that is perfect! That was, in fact, just the feeling I got when Dracula smashed Harker's mirror, as he made a moralistic, self-righteous argument to justify his action, while cloaking his real motive. Gotta love Zizek.

The author then deploys his film-specific argument, which he adapts from Christian Metz: the film itself is a mirror; (quoting Metz) "although everything comes to be projected, there is one thing, and one thing only that is never reflected in it: the spectator's own body." Magnan then goes on to apply this idea to vampire cinema; here is his claim: "the mirrors in which vampires cannot be seen are analogous to the film-mirror that we encounter when we go to the cinema to view on of these films. As such, it is clear that not only are we aligned with the vampire through the space we wenter and the darkness we become enveloped in, but we are the vampires we see in front of us."

Now, that is interesting - and I think just the OPPOSITE is happening with Stoker's book, exactly because the only first-person experience we are denied is that of the Count himself. Writing is different from film; it is not 'spectating' in the same way (although I should probably think about that some more). When Stoker gives us diaries, documents, even phonograph records, he is prodding us to share the first-person experiences of so many different characters in the novel… but never the Count! I wonder if Magnan will comment on this - but his interest is in the films, so it's not exactly relevant to his topic.

Yep, as expected, the rest of the article is really concerned with questions of film and visual representation (it's fun stuff; in general, I enjoy film criticism so much more than literary criticism… I wonder why that is… hmmmm). Anyway, this was very useful. I probably cannot get hold of Zizek's "Enjoy Your Symptom!" as cited here, but I would read it with pleasure. Eegad, I guess maybe I should read some Lacan. But really, I would rather read some FOLKLORE.

So, while this article was good fun and thought-provoking, I am going to seek out some folklore to read next.