Destruction, Death, and Mayhem, Has Never Been This Social

I find this particular post at CollegeHumor.com quite amusing and impressive.  It's one of those jokes that also has some great insight and reveals ways of delivering information in unique and different formats.  I imagine that this kind of work would actually make it easier for students of the "Facebook" generation to visualize (and eventually conceptualize) the events and the stakes of World War II.  Now that may sound silly; how could it invoke the stakes of World War II; after all, one is considered the most significant event of the last hundred years and the other is World War II.  Ooops, I mean, the other is Facebook.  But in truth, Facebook does have a much more clear and central role in people's lives in the early 21st century than WWII does.  And before the eyes rolls and people start saying "Well, that says a lot about the people of the early 21st century," realize that we are compelled by things that are dynamic and can be engaged with;  World War II, by and large, is static or at least the means of bestowing its information and significance are static in the education system.  Books; documentaries, oral histories; and for those like myself, graphic novels.  There is some interaction there but not compared to what one does with Facebook. 

I've posed this question to my students before.  Who is the creator of your facebook profile?  Some look at me with a crazy look that hints at my intelligence or "hip" factor (and I realize by using the word "hip" significantly deterioriates any "hip"ness I might have) and they answer "I do."  More critical students may say, "Facebook does."  But very few remember realize that it's not just "Facebook, Inc" or "Me" but also our "Friends" that create our page.  We send links, poke, comment, have contact through applications, recommend friends and a variety of other tools of interaction that builds our profile and our "community." So, the interaction and communal building does make Facebook more relevant to our lives; we want to see how people react and build upon what we’ve done.  (After all, we often post stuff—links, pics, videos, etc, with the hope that people will respond). 

Therefore, something like the WWII on Facebook is an ingenious and intriguing way to parley such information.  In fact, I’m considering pushing students to re-create such similar historical (or even literary like the Romeo & Juliet on Facebook).  It uses students’ interest and pushes them to think more creatively about their forms of communication and social networks.  What's most interesting is that it takes sophisticate thought not only to create; but to understand.  Many of the jokes stem from both a knowledge of Facebook and of WWII, so if you're laughing, there's a chance you're understanding both. 

QUESTIONS

What are other examples of this out there on the Internet that use different things like online social networks to convey complex historical events, literary concepts, or even complex narratives?  In discussing or posting some, please explain in some detail how and what the author(s) are doing in their work and how it relates to this discussion.

How accurate is the WWII post (and have some evidence or clear means of proving your statements in this regard)? 

What might be (or exist) some critical responses to this?



Did you enjoy this read? Let me know your thoughts down below or feel free to browse around and check out some of my other posts!. You might also want to keep up to date with my blog by signing up for them via email. 

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Comments

  1. What are other examples of this out there on the Internet that use different things like online social networks to convey complex historical events, literary concepts, or even complex narratives?
    After reading this article on Funnyordie.com, I looked around on the website and found a funny picture http://www.funnyordie.com/images/77100b20c2/thanks-mussolini-thanks-a-bunch which is based upon World War Two also. The picture shows Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler at what seems to be an Axis party rally. Mussolini is giving the “Nazi Salute” while Hitler is just standing there. There is a caption below that says “HANDS UP if you think Hitler is a douche bag!” while Mussolini is giving the salute. This is a pop culture event also being satirized but does not depict the picture correctly because to the untrained eye, a person would think that Mussolini and Hitler were enemies.

    In discussing or posting some, please explain in some detail how and what the author(s) are doing in their work and how it relates to this discussion.
    The author is satirizing the use of Facebook from the youth. He implies that it is easier to teach something as complex as serious as WWII by using something as frivolous as Facebook or other social networking websites. He catalogs the entire war from the beginning when the Axis and Allies are being formed, until the end of the war when the Ally victory is declared. He uses “Facebook Statuses” to depict the war in its entirety.



    How accurate is the WWII post (and have some evidence or clear means of proving your statements in this regard)?
    This WWII post is accurate because the author depicts the events of WWII starting way before Pearl Harbor when Germany and Italy became the Axis Powers, until the end of the war when U.S.A. bombs Japan. He puts an update that says “Japan- tonight we dine in PEARL HARBOR!!!” dated on December, 7, 1941 which was the correct date. He also uses the “Relationship Status” part of the Facebook to state which countries are friendly towards each other. He posts, “Germany and Italy are now married” on May 22, 1939. These posts correctly portray the dates on which these real events occurred.

    What might be (or exist) some critical responses to this?
    I believe that the author’s original intent of the WWII Facebook article was to portray the events of World War II in a comical and modern way. First of all, I noticed that the author left out the Holocaust while writing the article. I believe he did this to avoid controversy and give respect towards those who lost their lives in that tragic event. If the author decided to put “Status updates” about said event, he would receive some internet backlash but could play it off as “Dark Humor” in a satirical article. Certain countries may feel reminded about their faults: Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, Germany taking over Poland, and U.S.A bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki.




    Posted- Ryan Viglione
    History 101 Wed and Fri.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What are other examples of this out there on the Internet that use different things like online social networks to convey complex historical events, literary concepts, or even complex narratives?
    After reading this article on Funnyordie.com, I looked around on the website and found a funny picture http://www.funnyordie.com/images/77100b20c2/thanks-mussolini-thanks-a-bunch which is based upon World War Two also. The picture shows Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler at what seems to be an Axis party rally. Mussolini is giving the “Nazi Salute” while Hitler is just standing there. There is a caption below that says “HANDS UP if you think Hitler is a douche bag!” while Mussolini is giving the salute. This is a pop culture event also being satirized but does not depict the picture correctly because to the untrained eye, a person would think that Mussolini and Hitler were enemies.

    In discussing or posting some, please explain in some detail how and what the author(s) are doing in their work and how it relates to this discussion.
    The author is satirizing the use of Facebook from the youth. He implies that it is easier to teach something as complex as serious as WWII by using something as frivolous as Facebook or other social networking websites. He catalogs the entire war from the beginning when the Axis and Allies are being formed, until the end of the war when the Ally victory is declared. He uses “Facebook Statuses” to depict the war in its entirety.



    How accurate is the WWII post (and have some evidence or clear means of proving your statements in this regard)?
    This WWII post is accurate because the author depicts the events of WWII starting way before Pearl Harbor when Germany and Italy became the Axis Powers, until the end of the war when U.S.A. bombs Japan. He puts an update that says “Japan- tonight we dine in PEARL HARBOR!!!” dated on December, 7, 1941 which was the correct date. He also uses the “Relationship Status” part of the Facebook to state which countries are friendly towards each other. He posts, “Germany and Italy are now married” on May 22, 1939. These posts correctly portray the dates on which these real events occurred.

    What might be (or exist) some critical responses to this?
    I believe that the author’s original intent of the WWII Facebook article was to portray the events of World War II in a comical and modern way. First of all, I noticed that the author left out the Holocaust while writing the article. I believe he did this to avoid controversy and give respect towards those who lost their lives in that tragic event. If the author decided to put “Status updates” about said event, he would receive some internet backlash but could play it off as “Dark Humor” in a satirical article. Certain countries may feel reminded about their faults: Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, Germany taking over Poland, and U.S.A bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


    Ryan Viglione
    History 101

    ReplyDelete
  3. What are other examples of this out there on the Internet that use different things like online social networks to convey complex historical events, literary concepts, or even complex narratives?
    After reading this article on Funnyordie.com, I looked around on the website and found a funny picture http://www.funnyordie.com/images/77100b20c2The picture shows Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler at what seems to be an Axis party rally. Mussolini is giving the “Nazi Salute” while Hitler is just standing there. There is a caption below that says “HANDS UP if you think Hitler is a douche bag!” while Mussolini is giving the salute. This is a pop culture event also being satirized but does not depict the picture correctly because to the untrained eye, a person would think that Mussolini and Hitler were enemies.

    In discussing or posting some, please explain in some detail how and what the author(s) are doing in their work and how it relates to this discussion.
    The author is satirizing the use of Facebook from the youth. He implies that it is easier to teach something as complex as serious as WWII by using something as frivolous as Facebook or other social networking websites. He catalogs the entire war from the beginning when the Axis and Allies are being formed, until the end of the war when the Ally victory is declared. He uses “Facebook Statuses” to depict the war in its entirety.



    How accurate is the WWII post (and have some evidence or clear means of proving your statements in this regard)?
    This WWII post is accurate because the author depicts the events of WWII starting way before Pearl Harbor when Germany and Italy became the Axis Powers, until the end of the war when U.S.A. bombs Japan. He puts an update that says “Japan- tonight we dine in PEARL HARBOR!!!” dated on December, 7, 1941 which was the correct date. He also uses the “Relationship Status” part of the Facebook to state which countries are friendly towards each other. He posts, “Germany and Italy are now married” on May 22, 1939. These posts correctly portray the dates on which these real events occurred.

    What might be (or exist) some critical responses to this?
    I believe that the author’s original intent of the WWII Facebook article was to portray the events of World War II in a comical and modern way. First of all, I noticed that the author left out the Holocaust while writing the article. I believe he did this to avoid controversy and give respect towards those who lost their lives in that tragic event. If the author decided to put “Status updates” about said event, he would receive some internet backlash but could play it off as “Dark Humor” in a satirical article. Certain countries may feel reminded about their faults: Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, Germany taking over Poland, and U.S.A bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    ReplyDelete
  4. What are other examples of this out there on the Internet that use different things like online social networks to convey complex historical events, literary concepts, or even complex narratives?
    After reading this article on Funnyordie.com, I looked around on the website and found a funny picture http://www.funnyordie.com/images/77100b20c2/thanks-mussolini-thanks-a-bunch which is based upon World War Two also. The picture shows Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler at what seems to be an Axis party rally. Mussolini is giving the “Nazi Salute” while Hitler is just standing there. There is a caption below that says “HANDS UP if you think Hitler is a douche bag!” while Mussolini is giving the salute. This is a pop culture event also being satirized but does not depict the picture correctly because to the untrained eye, a person would think that Mussolini and Hitler were enemies.

    In discussing or posting some, please explain in some detail how and what the author(s) are doing in their work and how it relates to this discussion.
    The author is satirizing the use of Facebook from the youth. He implies that it is easier to teach something as complex as serious as WWII by using something as frivolous as Facebook or other social networking websites. He catalogs the entire war from the beginning when the Axis and Allies are being formed, until the end of the war when the Ally victory is declared. He uses “Facebook Statuses” to depict the war in its entirety.



    How accurate is the WWII post (and have some evidence or clear means of proving your statements in this regard)?
    This WWII post is accurate because the author depicts the events of WWII starting way before Pearl Harbor when Germany and Italy became the Axis Powers, until the end of the war when U.S.A. bombs Japan. He puts an update that says “Japan- tonight we dine in PEARL HARBOR!!!” dated on December, 7, 1941 which was the correct date. He also uses the “Relationship Status” part of the Facebook to state which countries are friendly towards each other. He posts, “Germany and Italy are now married” on May 22, 1939. These posts correctly portray the dates on which these real events occurred.

    What might be (or exist) some critical responses to this?
    I believe that the author’s original intent of the WWII Facebook article was to portray the events of World War II in a comical and modern way. First of all, I noticed that the author left out the Holocaust while writing the article. I believe he did this to avoid controversy and give respect towards those who lost their lives in that tragic event. If the author decided to put “Status updates” about said event, he would receive some internet backlash but could play it off as “Dark Humor” in a satirical article. Certain countries may feel reminded about their faults: Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, Germany taking over Poland, and U.S.A bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki.


    Ryan Viglione
    History 101

    ReplyDelete
  5. What are other examples of this out there on the Internet that use different things like online social networks to convey complex historical events, literary concepts, or even complex narratives?
    After reading this article on Funnyordie.com, I looked around on the website and found a funny picture http://www.funnyordie.com/images/77100b20c2/thanks-mussolini-thanks-a-bunch which is based upon World War Two also. The picture shows Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler at what seems to be an Axis party rally. Mussolini is giving the “Nazi Salute” while Hitler is just standing there. There is a caption below that says “HANDS UP if you think Hitler is a douche bag!” while Mussolini is giving the salute. This is a pop culture event also being satirized but does not depict the picture correctly because to the untrained eye, a person would think that Mussolini and Hitler were enemies.

    In discussing or posting some, please explain in some detail how and what the author(s) are doing in their work and how it relates to this discussion.
    The author is satirizing the use of Facebook from the youth. He implies that it is easier to teach something as complex as serious as WWII by using something as frivolous as Facebook or other social networking websites. He catalogs the entire war from the beginning when the Axis and Allies are being formed, until the end of the war when the Ally victory is declared. He uses “Facebook Statuses” to depict the war in its entirety.



    How accurate is the WWII post (and have some evidence or clear means of proving your statements in this regard)?
    This WWII post is accurate because the author depicts the events of WWII starting way before Pearl Harbor when Germany and Italy became the Axis Powers, until the end of the war when U.S.A. bombs Japan. He puts an update that says “Japan- tonight we dine in PEARL HARBOR!!!” dated on December, 7, 1941 which was the correct date. He also uses the “Relationship Status” part of the Facebook to state which countries are friendly towards each other. He posts, “Germany and Italy are now married” on May 22, 1939. These posts correctly portray the dates on which these real events occurred.

    What might be (or exist) some critical responses to this?
    I believe that the author’s original intent of the WWII Facebook article was to portray the events of World War II in a comical and modern way. First of all, I noticed that the author left out the Holocaust while writing the article. I believe he did this to avoid controversy and give respect towards those who lost their lives in that tragic event. If the author decided to put “Status updates” about said event, he would receive some internet backlash but could play it off as “Dark Humor” in a satirical article. Certain countries may feel reminded about their faults: Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, Germany taking over Poland, and U.S.A bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 1. After reading this article on Funnyordie.com, I looked around on the website and found a funny picture which is based upon World War Two also. The picture shows Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler at what seems to be an Axis party rally. Mussolini is giving the “Nazi Salute” while Hitler is just standing there. There is a caption below that says “HANDS UP if you think Hitler is a douche bag!” while Mussolini is giving the salute. This is a pop culture event also being satirized but does not depict the picture correctly because to the untrained eye, a person would think that Mussolini and Hitler were enemies.

    2. The author is satirizing the use of Facebook from the youth. He implies that it is easier to teach something as complex as serious as WWII by using something as frivolous as Facebook or other social networking websites. He catalogs the entire war from the beginning when the Axis and Allies are being formed, until the end of the war when the Ally victory is declared. He uses “Facebook Statuses” to depict the war in its entirety.




    3. This WWII post is accurate because the author depicts the events of WWII starting way before Pearl Harbor when Germany and Italy became the Axis Powers, until the end of the war when U.S.A. bombs Japan. He puts an update that says “Japan- tonight we dine in PEARL HARBOR!!!” dated on December, 7, 1941 which was the correct date. He also uses the “Relationship Status” part of the Facebook to state which countries are friendly towards each other. He posts, “Germany and Italy are now married” on May 22, 1939. These posts correctly portray the dates on which these real events occurred.

    4. I believe that the author’s original intent of the WWII Facebook article was to portray the events of World War II in a comical and modern way. First of all, I noticed that the author left out the Holocaust while writing the article. I believe he did this to avoid controversy and give respect towards those who lost their lives in that tragic event. If the author decided to put “Status updates” about said event, he would receive some internet backlash but could play it off as “Dark Humor” in a satirical article. Certain countries may feel reminded about their faults: Japan bombing Pearl Harbor, Germany taking over Poland, and U.S.A bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    ReplyDelete
  7. What kind of shit was that? World War two done on FaceBook is not my idea of being funny, it's not even "Dark Humor", what it is is tastless trash.It's trash written by someone who has no coception of the pain and suffering that the war caused. Was this guys family living on the f#@*ing moon when the war was fought? Over 11 million people died, and anther 15 or so million maimed, never mind the homeless and fatherless or motherless or both.His family was very lucky if it was not touched by the horrers of war.
    Yes Hitler was a Douche-bag, but we made him one.If France and England had not tried to ring every drop of blood out of Germany after the first war Hitler would have had nothing to use to rally his people with. Mussolini well his nose was so far up Hitler arse that when Hitler farted it came out of Mussolini. They were both Douche-bags that got what was coming to them.If you want to have fun with them watch The Three Stooges.
    Now for Pearl Harbor,yes the Japaneese did us dirty,but it was not planed as a sneak attack. There is still much contravercey if we could have stopped them before it happened.
    As far as Hiroshima and Nagasaki go there are a lot of people who feel that when we droped those two bombs that we opened "Pandora's Box", and that even now it is still open, and death is still waiting inside.
    I'm on Facebook, I have a lot of fun,hell I'm even friends with some of my peers here at Salem State. What Facebook is not is a tool to talk about things like death and suffering and mass murder that is what we have History Books for.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, facebook is a place where we may poke, post a wall comment/picture/video about anything, hopeing for a responce back on it, but I agree with Mike, Facebook is not a place to be discussing major happenings like deaths and suffering. Facebook is a place where we are intended to interact and keep in touch with friends and family and enjoy each others company online if it can't be in person. Major happenings like say World War II should not be discussed and or even have their own page on face, they should most certainley be kept for us to read about in our History books, because thats what history is all about, learning about all the events including war, death etc...leading up to where we are at today. Also, it is kind of like Wikipedia. Someone could post a page on World War II and it may not be true information at all, it would be all a lie and bull shitted. I am not saying that Wikipedia is a bad site, I am just saying people can change it to different information, and on facebook people can share more information that they claim is "true" and others may read it and completely believe what their eyes have read. These are some reasons for thoughts of why it is a very dumb idea to have such a page like World War II being shared over facebook.

    ReplyDelete
  9. (In regards to Michael O.)
    You seriously need to calm down, you are being way to over dramatic about this thing. I could not disagree more with you on this.
    So the guy made a comical strip about World War II, awesome. From what I can see of it there is no intention anywhere of him mocking the families of the people who died, even though all the people directly effect probably do not have a Facebook to understand anyways. But he did not come out and mock the people, he was mocking the countries like everyone else in the world does. He is giving us a good laugh about the actions of countries that caused such a large war in terms that today's era understands.
    I look at this as a good way to give the children of today a humorous and basic description of World War II because this strip does give a basic description to what really happened. There was no reason for you to get so defensive and freak out about this at all, it is a harmless comic strip about Facebook and history and that is all. There is no shots being taken at families, this guy was not like "Oh those people next door lost their Dad to World War II, F**k them I am going to mock the sh*t out of them." No he was just looking to make people smile while using a historical event as a background for it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. With Facebook we can pretty much talk to anyone and become friends with our friends that have moved to not only different states but a different continent. We can poke, comment, recommend things and invite people to things so why not make it a place for learning too. With today’s generation doing anything possible with technology why not incorporate a little knowledge with it. Maybe if some teachers did this, students could connect with the material they are being taught and better understand the things that happened in context with something familiar. The WWII on Facebook is very creative and somewhat humorous but I’m not convinced that it would help students better understand what actually happened during the war. Some students may get caught up in the humor of it rather than learn the material that is being taught. The concept is a good idea what I think we need to be realistic. I completely agree that teachers should connect with this generation with get a better reaction out of their students but maybe not through Facebook or any other websites like it. I think that Facebook and other sites should be left alone and continue with their original purpose, to connect people.

    ReplyDelete
  11. After taking a look at the post on CollegeHumor.com I found its purpose right away. Aside from its accuracy the idea of the pretend Facebook page of Germany was obviously supposed to be humorous. Not only did Germany have a “Facebook Page” but other countries around the time of World War II were given a page as well. By doing so, the creator of this post was able to show the interactions using various posts, pictures, and interactions between Germany and the other countries. I actually found it clever that the person who created this took advantage of the “relationship” part of Facebook. They had Germany “is now in a relationship with Italy”. I thought posts such as those were funny. I know that the post was not by any chance politically correct in all aspects (especially the last post where USA asks what Germany did with all the “juice”) but it was very funny. I found myself laughing out loud a couple of times.

    You said ”But in truth, Facebook does have a much more clear and central role in people's lives in the early 21st century than WWII does.” I do agree with that. People of the 21st century may be interested in World War II but it is possible that they have other interests as well. WWII does not provide direct, interactive feedback to the person involving their time in studying it. Facebook, on the otherhand is interactive and fun to be a part of. By looking at this post on College Humor, I was kept interested. I think it was a fun and creative way to portray information in a way that I understand easily due to the fact that I am on Facebook almost daily! I think more things like this involving history would be fun. I am not someone who is interested in all types of history. So something like this pretend Facebook, maybe in studying other kinds of history would be great. This type of learning is not just limited to history, I think that anything could be put into something as cool as this.

    And sorry Michael O. but when you said “What Facebook is not is a tool to talk about things like death and suffering and mass murder that is what we have History Books for.” I could not disagree anymore. Facebook is a place for interacting with whoever you want and however you want. Like it was said earlier in the post, we are the ones who create Facebook, and we are the ones who control what is being posted. So in all technicality, Facebook is a tool that can be used however one wants to use it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Agreeing with some of the comments posted above, Facebook is not really the place to be discussing historical events. Although one should have some sort of enlightenment on World War 2 and definitely not be ignorant of the subject, Facebook would not be serving it’s purpose on the internet if it was regarded as a historical network. With today’s generation Facebook has a captivating one of interesting people of all kinds, history does not. Unfortunately, history is looked at as more of a college requirement or an interest more than anything else. Again, important events should be well known to all and that is why history is a required subject in the school systems, but let’s face it not everyone enjoys it. Facebook would essentially become less popular if it was known as a history website. Not to mention the history would in a way lose its essential importance if it was just spread around on a common internet site. World War 2 is an event nine times out of ten will we come across in our lives and inevitably, be informed about. There is no need to express its importance in our day to day social lives. Putting the information on Facebook could subject it to lessen its importance and possibly its truth as well because different interpretations can and will be made and WWll would turn into a free for all.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I disagree with the anonymous comment above mine because I believe that facebook is a social network; a place where people can connect and discuss anything they choose to. I don't see the problem in people discussing historical events if that's what they choose to talk about... just because history is not something that everyone enjoys does not mean it should be something people need to refrain from discussing through facebook. If people are interested in historical topics and choose to talk about them with other people, facebook is actually a great place to do so. They could possibly start a group so that everyone interested could contribute to the topic... and for those who are not interested do not have to join the group. Facebook would not become less popular, if anything, it would become more popular because more people who have different interests could feel free to talk about whatever appeases them. I also feel like history would not lose it's essential importance at all. I think spreading it around a commonly used internet site would do nothing but make people more aware of history and different events. Facebook would allow people to share their thoughts on different historical topics and be able to discuss their opinions in a civil manor.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I thought the whole article was pretty pointless and wasn't even funny. As a reader you don't really gain anything from it knowledge-wise. If anything you would get a very basic idea of who was on what side during the war, but other than that it has no value. The article's aim was obviously to humor the readers but I didn't even find it funny and it seemed like the author was trying too hard to make it funny. Yeah, the topic of WW2 can be a very serious matter but what would comedy be if people weren't allowed to make fun of things that certain people find offensive. WW2 is something that everyone knows about and the author's intentions were clearly to clown on the era, so I can see why some people could get offended. But this is the internet and there are plenty of worse things than this.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I found the post from College Humor quite interesting and humorous at the same time. I could not wrap my head around the fact that we now have the technology to create an online version of World War II. It is amazing to think that we are now able to learn more about this war simply by signing onto our facebooks.
    I agree that this type of information posted on a forum such as Facebook could help students in understanding this historic war. Our young generation is exposed to technology and social networking websites at such young ages. More children will understand the war if it is explained to them through something like a thread on Facebook. Children these days are more invested in Facebook, so if a World War II page was posted, they would be able to read and learn about the war through this website. Having World War II on Facebook is truly beneficial to our young generation in conveying the story of this important war. Hopefully, by posting information about the war on Facebook, the younger crowd will gain more of an appreciation towards this particular time in history. Furthermore, it will hopefully convey more details regarding the events that took place in order to give kids more insight as to what took place throughout World War II.

    ReplyDelete
  16. After reading the post from College Humor I can only applaud whoever created such a thing. I understand why some people would find this highly offensive. It does poke fun of WWII and portray it in a lighter tone. It’s undeniable that WWII was one of the most tragic events to have ever occurred in history. However, I believe this is a great way for students to learn and make connections. I encouraged professors and teachers to use this approach because last year my English teacher divided the class into groups and assigned every group a character from Shakespeare’s Hamlet. We had to do the same thing, create statuses, groups, wall posts between all the characters and it really did benefit the entire class. Not to mention it demands creativity from the students’ behalf. I think assignments such as these, accompanied with the traditional way WWII is taught in the classroom will only help students.

    ReplyDelete
  17. When looking at the way Facebook helped communicate information that normally takes some history classes a month to teach, it amazed me. Although it takes a clearly lighthearted approach to a very serious subject it is very effective in communicating the information. For example, the Facebook page was able to let the reader know that there were two different alliances; the Axis and the Allied powers without plainly saying so. It also makes the information easier to remember and once one can remember the basic events they can take the next step and analyze what the event means. Also because it takes such an interactive form on the page it intertwines humor and teaching which I’ve always found makes it easier to understand things.
    When I think of interactive information one of the first places my mind goes is to Wikipedia. All the knowledge on the website is all due to people who edit it, and anyone can do so. In order to get information on a particular subject one has to rely on the knowledge of the people living around them. At first the idea seemed stupid because there are a lot of people in the world who don’t know very much but I’ve come to change my mind about it. Here is knowledge, the collective knowledge of anyone living and to me that makes it more real. It isn’t some nameless expert using flowery language to prove that they know more than you do trying to explain events that they understand only slightly better. The fact is that knowledge, like people, is always changing and the nature of knowledge should match the medium through which it is presented. I think presenting ideas in the ways that people use every day is smart. It makes learning and understanding far more tangible, and who knows maybe it will cause some people to actually think about what they are learning.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think the post on World War Two, while hilarious, is a perfect example of the need to not let a single person have too much influence over a society. How often do we see little pointless spats like this on Facebook? Now imagine that one of the people in the disagreement had major influence over an army or nation. When too much power is given to individuals it corrupts them. We should be happy that we live in a world where the futile ego trips of people can be satisfied by posting a cowardly remark on facebook. The post symbolizes how vain the tiny problems in our daily lives are. When allowed to escalate those problems become giant messes.
    As for the accuracy of the article it is not a book on WWII but it does capture some of the base ideas of the war. When Germany takes over Austria and the UK and France act completely indifferent, that actually happened. Germany’s invasion of the USSR after the USSR had also invaded Poland is also symbolized in the article. Bottom line is that it was a fine modern comedic representation of WWII that would relate to the younger generation.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Just about everyone has a Facebook today, especially teens. A great way to learn something is to learn it on something we are familiar with. Students generally do not like textbooks. I feel students could learn more on history through Facebook.

    Also in High School, I had a project like this. We had to create a Myspace page for Napoleon. We had to choose music, profile picture, use blogs, and select a back round. I feel a learned a lot about him through this project.

    This post of WW2 is interesting. Facebook can actually make WW2 clearer. This page is dedicated to WW2. What helped me was the relationship statuses. For example when it says the UK and France are now friends. Also the friends list helps too. It says Germany and Italy are now friends. Through these post you can see alliances and what side countries were on.

    I feel that some people could be offended by this especially soldiers who fought in this war. There are jokes in here that soldiers wouldn’t find funny. For example, when it says U.S has poked Japan. Soldiers could think the author is making such a serious event into a joke. I don’t get that feeling, but I think some could get that feeling.

    ReplyDelete
  20. After reading the post on CollegeHumor.com I immediately thought of a packet my British Literature teacher handed out to us last year. It was a series of fake Facebook post such as the ones above from the characters of the book "Pride and Prejudice". If you have read the book, you know it can be quite dry and confusing between all the relationships and their twisted plots, but this make believe Facebook wall really helped us understand what was going on between the characters in the book because it was put into a way of communication we could understand. There were relationship changes, photos, notes, tags, pokes, likes, and comments going back and forth between the characters. There was very little Old English used so we could much better understand what the characters were saying.

    Bringing history into Facebook is a great idea. Most of my class had no idea what was really going on in the book until she handed out the packets and after we read them it was much easier to go back into the book and now know precisely what was happening. When going online to see if I could find a link to this make believe P&P Facebook I could not find it, so I'm not really sure where she got it from, but it is very similar to the WW2 post shown in this article.

    ReplyDelete
  21. After looking at the post about World War II on CollegeHumor.com, I understood the humor of doing it as Facebook post. It was a clever humor for younger individuals to understand about the World War II. Facebook was used in this humorous idea to get the understanding of World War II and the interactions between Germany and with other countries. Germany and the other countries had their own Facebook page and it showed who was “in a relationship” like for example there was a post saying Germany is now “in a relationship” with Italy. It is also creative how College Humor explained how countries interacted with each other during this time period by using Facebook as a way to show people now these days to understand what happened during World War II better. Some of the post in this humor was not totally true. For example, when USA sends a post to Germany asking what did he do with all the juice, this is just adding more humor to the whole thing. I thought it was funny that Facebook is like the “big” thing now these days and whoever has a Facebook would understand where the humor is coming from. Not so much that war back then is not a joke, but the way it is presented was pretty funny.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Short Story #362: The Day The World Almost Came to an End by Pearl Crayton

Presenting on Hybrid-Flexible Pedagogy

Review: Mistress of Dragons