Paulo Freire

Freire has imagined that in the absence of collective action there can’t be a sustainable theory, since “genuine theory can only be derived from some praxis rooted in historical struggles” His research in practices of education for critical consciousness has tended to be focused on social groups that would become a model for his theory. I will begin to examine the practice of DIY culture and only after that will I explain the relation with the theory. My case study research methodology is going to focus on the previously mentioned practices of media education that will encompass the DIY media landscape in India. Each element that forms the DIY sphere of media creates its own network according to its context and environment.

In his latest book “The pedagogy of hope”, Freire reveals that one of the tasks of democratic popular education is the “enabling the popular classes to develop their language, not the authoritarian, sectarian gobbledygook of ‘educators’ but their own language – which, emerging from and returning upon their reality sketches out of conjectures, the designs, the anticipations of their new world” The contemporary approach on DIY should take his heritage into account as a practical guide for building dialogues among different pedagogical standpoints in relation to media literacy and education.

DIY media education

The culture of media education in India follows the motivation and role of apprehension and participation in the media and technological production. One of the aspects of this research will enfold upon the practice of constant participation in the reformation of media and technology forms in the urban space of India. The key question that I will try to focus on is how does DIY emerge as a tool for media pedagogy?

Ashis Nandy enfolds an interesting discussion on the implication of cultural practices in contrast with the national, in fact“ in modern societies the nation-state-oriented approach seems natural and rational, and the culture-oriented one unnatural, irrational or primitive. ” My understanding of the national ICT policy and the DIY media education seem to float in between discussion of state oriented totalizing pedagogy on one hand and the local creative participatory culture of open knowledge and networks on the other.

As a reflection on the media sphere in India, I will focus on two major components of DIY practices, the first are going to include different forms of media participation that are being collectively shaped inside the Sarai media labs and specific urban intervention project ranging from the field of media research lab to street art.

The second component of DIY practice that I will focus on is the example of the sustainable network, which opens practical and theoretical questions of technological participation. Here I would like to stress the fact that I would relate to media pedagogy is the confrontation and possibilities of self-sustainable technology, specifically referring to the management of the networks. The Tibetan technological center is focusing its research capabilities on building a mesh network that will connect local Tibetan schools with an independent network connection. This practice is interesting from the perspective of development, media exchange that fosters cultural constituency and legitimacy.

Henry Jenkins in his research publication: “Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: media education for the 21st century” explains that the focus of participatory culture, has shifted its focus from individual to community expression. His contribution’s aim on the perspective of the digital divide debate shifts attention from discourse of access to technology and focus instead on participation and development of “cultural competencies and skills.”

I will decide to separate DIY practices into categories in order to provide a coherent structure for the thesis and to seek relationships, territorial and virtual maps. I will consider practices of DIY media education that would possibly create a theory of media production and technological innovation that exist outside the model of private and national media. Their existence lies in a cultural landscape that seeks legitimacy in physical and virtual public spaces, thus their practice is community oriented and lack a formal constituency not reflecting the classical institutional bonds. Furthermore, this standpoint accelerates their visibility in the public realm of media education in Indian culture and provides an example of horizontal structure of critical media pedagogy.

In March 2007 the Art&Design gallery at Columbia College in Chicago will host an exhibition, which will display the convergence of DIY activity and practice. Their investigation and the preparation for the exhibition led to a map of DIY culture, composed by four overlapping spheres:

1) the economic,
2) political,
3) socio-cultural and
4) technological.

These four fields become representational for a mediated environment that coexist and shares a global network on one hand, and the urban aspect of media production and education. The map that emerged from this comprehension of DIY practices clearly shows the convergence, interconnectivity and coexistence of various media forms that all form a DIY culture. In this perspective, DIY culture encourage the production and consumption of multimedia forms, which interact with the four spheres I have just mentioned.

Mizuko Ito in her research at the USC Annenberg Center focused on amateur cultural production in the age of networks and defined users of DIY media that are “growing in salience with the turn toward networked public culture. She focuses on the actors that form a culture of DIY, their relationship and motivation inside spaces of media participation. She has segmented participation and defined these actors as follow:

1) amateur and non-market production,
2) networked collectivities for producing and sharing culture,
3) niche and special-interest groups, and
4) aesthetics of parody, remix, and appropriation.”

In my case study I will refer to her segmentation of actors that form DIY media practices. Users that investigate the reality of network formation in urban areas of India have a much more intrinsic characteristics defined by cultural interests and behaviour. Indeed at first glance they maintain an intertwined structure between elements of being amateurs, working in networks, being part of interest groups and using aesthetics of remixes and appropriation. The challenge will be to converge these characteristics into an opportunity for fostering a significant DIY media education paradigm.