The Gazelle had taken a mighty long nap in a faraway pasture, but now she has arisen again!
Last night I went to the Bryant Lake Bowl to see "Cafe Scientifique: Principles of Economics." According to the UMN website, where I learned about this event, it was to be a lecture-performance. The sole author, performer and lecturer Andrew Cassey just recently completed his economics Ph.D. at UMN. Apparently Cassey first put this kind of performance together, based on years of teaching intro to econ, during a fringe show event when he "conceived of the notion of teaching economics as 'a performance art.'"
I posted this event on the Big Tent and got several takers right away, all perhaps with different reasons for wanted to see The Principles of Economics. Foremost for me, I wanted to see the adaptation of the lecture form to the theatrical situation. Somewhat to my surprise, there really was not that much adaptation. Cassey was full of energy, he dropped a few 'f-bombs' and he made a some irreverent asides. But all in all, this could have been a lecture taken right out of his intro to econ class. There was a way in which Cassey was able to distance himself from the serious and official demeanor associated with the classroom at the same time as he drew charts of GDP-and-CPI curves on a green chalkboard center stage. Was this position achieved through Cassey's own inventiveness, or did it at least partially have to do with economics place in our culture today? Can economics today claim a certain position of common-sense logic that more "critical" schools of thought would have difficulty achieving?
The audiences' response was the most interesting part of the whole event. They were not entirely compliant with all the demands of the lecture scenario, though they were to a large degree. There were side conversations, and a few challenging questions (None of these questions, however, really aimed at revealing the ideological assumptions encoded into the strand of economic thought Cassey was espousing. I didn't see a good chance to offer such a question myself). No one really heckled him nor was there any sort of revolt by audience members bored by the didactic nature of the lecture. Most everyone seemed in good spirits and thankful for their entertaining knowledge-nourishment. Maybe it was the peculiar self-selected crowd (not many academics, I suspect, but more middle-age good-citizens types), or maybe the lecture as a form is not so antithetical to popular culture as we might think.
I
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Hey Tony. Interesting post. I wanted to go to this thing but had other stuff going on. What kind of ideological assumptions were espoused in the lecture? Anyway, thanks for the review.
As for the assumptions behind Casey's presentation, I was just thinking of the standard ones that go along with mainstream economics - a demand-driven economy, rational consumer choice, an emphasis on rating economic performance in a way that ignores distribution of wealth.
Sorry for a delayed reply . . .
waterpipe, is slang for a bong. or a technical term where water is the main filtration device for smokables.
i believe you meant to refer to graffiti on the faucet...?
Post a Comment