Theorem 1:

Gee explains how “Discourses are not like languages in one very important regard. Someone can speak English, but not fluently. However, someone cannot engage in a Discourse in a less than fully fluently manner. You are either in it or you’re not.” To me it seems like this statement could be controversial. He’s saying how either you are or aren’t in a Discourse and that “failing to fully display an identity is a tantamount to announcing you don’t have that identity, that at best you’re pretender or a beginner.” It could also be controversial because some people may think that’s not accurate information. Just because you may not be “fluent” with something or in a conversation, that doesn’t mean you are inexperienced. Gee says that its “…you as a pretender to the social role instantiated in the Discourse.” Some may not think the same way.

Theorem 2:

Gee states in theorem two that primary Discourses can NEVER really be liberating literacies. He says that in order for a literacy to be liberating “…it must contain both the Discourse it is going to critique and a set of meta-elements”. Apparently since they are primary they can’t contain anything other than themselves. It could be controversial because others could say otherwise. He says that since “… they cannot carry out an authentic criticism, because they cannot verbalize the words, acts, values, and attitudes they use…”, but who is to say what can and can’t carry out an authentic criticism.

“Mushfake” means “…do with something less when the real thing is not available.”, which I interpret this as making-do. Meta-knowledge is a “…set of meta-words, meta-values, meta-beliefs…” which is knowledge from what we already know and what we’ve learned in life already. It’s learning from what you’ve already learned before. Resistance shows up in these three concepts because it produces even more knowledge. Gee states that “… this seems to me like a good combination for successful students and successful social change.”. “Mushfake”, resistance, and meta-knowledge are all quality’s students should have.

Cuddy’s ideas and Gee’s recommendations both relate to each other. An example of this is when Cuddy talks about peoples body language because Gee somewhat relates to this as well. Gee states “Discourses are ways of being in the world; they are forms of life which integrate words, acts, beliefs, attitudes, and social identities as well as gestures, glances, body positions, and clothes.” Body positions are clear signs of feeling vulnerable and uncomfortable. Body positions are clear, tell-tale signs of how a person is feeling. A Discourse is a “identity kit” which can tell how act, talk and even write. Body positions can also be “identity kits” because you can tell how a person is feeling just by looking at them.

 

This part of Gee’s writing relates to Cuddy’s “fake it ’till you make it” and I though it connected well.

 

 

 

 

I annotated this because I was thinking how other people may think that this isn’t necessarily true. He states how either “you’re either in it or you’re not”, and I think that some people may think otherwise.

 

 

 

 

To “Mushfake” something is to make-do with what you have. I’ve learned to do this throughout my life and I think it is  a good quality to have.

I underlined this because this defined what some types of Discourses could be.  It cleared up any questions I had about Discourses.