![](\"http:\/\/cyber.law.harvard.edu\/blogs\/static\/dowbrigade\/pods800.jpg\")
The Dowbrigade has always been a sucker for the latest
\n thrill. Whenever it looks like the other kids are having more fun than
\n we are, we have to get in on the action. So we have been casting increasingly
\n jealous glances at the Podcasting crowd, trying to figure an angle to
\n get us in the door, some form to apply the phenomena to what we have
\n been doing or are trying to do, some way to contribute to the movement.<\/p>\n
We initially came up empty. Although we liked listening
\n to some of the podcasts we were downloading, it didn’t seems a natural
\n form of self-expression to us, nothing like the adrenalin rush we got
\n when we started blogging. <\/p>\n
In fact, we were stuck on the same point which had gotten These two superficially similar On the other hand, when we are reading we can stop to savor an idiomatic Our writing methodology is similar. Although We have survived enough situations with our foot lodged This is not to minimize in any way the art and utility Some people are great writers. Others are great Finally, while we actually like how our writing looks Then we realized that we DO a stand-up, three-hour More to the point, would anybody be interested? Its Plus we can force those occasional students with flimsy Anyway, we have resolved to try recording our classes We’ll post the results of this experiment soon, together The Dowbrigade has always been a sucker for the latest thrill. Whenever it looks like the other kids are having more fun than we are, we have to get in on the action. So we have been casting increasingly jealous … Continue reading
\n us back when we
\n first considered <\/a>the great stuff Christopher
\n Lydon <\/a>was doing with integrated audio interviews on his blog. It
\n comes down to the essential differences between writing and talking.<\/p>\n
\n uses of language are actually quiet different in terms of cognitive
\n processing. When we participate in a conversation or listen to an podcast,
\n our attention is focused on the voice and flow of ideas being communicated.
\n We are
\n forced to follow the train of thought in a more or less linear manner,
\n determined by the speed and linguistic associations of the speakers.
\n Although interesting comments, ideas and connections may flash through
\n our minds as we listen,
\n unless we
\n take careful notes or have an exceptional memory, they usually fade away
\n unexplored.<\/p>\n
\n gem, marvel at a lyric construction, note and develop those spontaneous
\n connections
\n that fill intellectual life with creativity and wonderment. Sometimes we will
\n spend an hour rereading and ruminating over a single paragraph; at others we
\n may skim an entire book in the same time. The speed and depth
\n of my
\n reading
\n are mine to control. We can check facts, look up contrary opinions and follow
\n idea paths that our reading inspires.<\/p>\n
\n we take to heart the "unedited" aspect of the blogging model, we confess
\n to reading over our output before posting, polishing a phrase here or
\n there, experimenting with synonyms to achieve style, flow and alliteration,
\n removing an occasional unintentionally insulting adjective or otherwise
\n "revising" before posting. <\/p>\n
\n firmly in our mouth to have little faith in our ability to "wing it"
\n verbally, and prefer the measured madness of our written voice.<\/p>\n
\n of oratory and verbal exposition. We have a deep admiration and appreciation
\n of those who can develop and expostulate on the spot elegant word castles
\n and arresting arguments. But it’s not our thing.<\/p>\n
\n talkers. There are even a few blessed individuals, (Chris
\n Lydon <\/a>and
\n Gore Vidal <\/a>come
\n to mind) who are great at both, but most of us must muddle through with
\n flawed skills and hope our offenses against the mother tongue are not
\n capital
\n in nature. <\/p>\n
\n and sounds up there on the Dowbrigade News, we have never been able to
\n stomach the sound of our own voice. We cringe whenever we hear
\n ourself on tape, convinced we sound like a pompous, adenoidal know-it-all,
\n which is, of course, pretty much what we are. The idea of doing a 30
\n or even ten minute voice feed as part of our blogging output filled us
\n with dread and disgust.<\/p>\n
\n vocal show EVERY DAY, five days a week, thirty two weeks a year, when
\n we get
\n up
\n in front
\n of our class and lecture, joke, drill, discuss, interview, instruct and
\n cajole them in the intricacies of Advanced Academic English. A Podcast
\n in the raw! If we just recorded our daily class, boiled it down to an
\n hour of highlights, and posted it to the class blog, would that qualify
\n as a podcast?<\/p>\n
\n just an English class, for God’s sake. Despite our mastery of the genre
\n and renowned didactic skills, the audience for such a show would be
\n limited, to say the least. But maybe somewhere in China, or in a small
\n town in Sudan, or in a hospital somewhere in Siberia, there is a kid
\n who wants to learn English and would be thrilled to listen, almost live,
\n to a class delivered that day at a major American University.<\/p>\n
\n excuses to listen to every class they miss. Students could replay classes
\n when studying for tests. There would be no escaping the Dowbrigade.<\/p>\n
\n on our iPod and posting the resulting mp3 files to our class blog, Monkeybrain. <\/a>We have no idea if the resultant file will be audible or in any way interesting
\n or useful, but hey, we’ll never know until we try.<\/p>\n
\n with some more thoughts on the utiity of podcasting academic lectures..<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"