Part 1 introduced some concepts of culturology and concrete media systems. Part 2 began addressing some topics on concrete media systems and why I care to study them in the first place, more from a futurist perspective. Part 3 looked at how learning styles affect our perceptions and interpretations. Today, I’ll launch into Part 4, which will address cultural trends and what they can tell us from a futurist’s perspective. Eventually, Part 5 will give my thoughts on the movie version of The Golden Compass.

First, an update: I ended Part 3 with the melodramatic moment that I had to rush over to eBay for the last minutes on an auction for the full set of seven Scholastic books that tie in with The Golden Compass. I’m sure my many readers want to know what happened as the resolve of that cliff-hanger!

Alas and alack – or would that be, I lack? – as I must report that I didn’t win said set. So sad … However, I discovered it was okay after I calmed down and consciously decelerated my internal torrent of “Christianized cursing” (you know exactly what I mean, e.g., Razzle-frazzle! Oh, fritzenfratzen! Poopybots! and so forth). And as it turned out, I was able to purchase some of the seven at a bookstore, and others packaged with other interesting items. Like a cool Golden Compass pressbook! Or, two Golden Compass commemorative bronze medallions from the video game! So, defeat was snatched from the jaws of victimry and I have only one book left to acquire in order to have the entire set. Which will be important for analyzing how Scholastic is positioning this material and whether it can be seen as implicitly or explicitly anti-Christian.

More on that in some other post with my thoughts about specific culture-crud items/systems for The Golden Compass. But it is now time to turn my attention to a futurist look at fads, short-term trends, and long-term drivers of social change that relate to Philip Pullman’s books and the first movie in this trilogy.

3. DIFFERENTIATION OF CULTURAL TRENDS

3. I study extensive culture crud systems of related products on the same topic to differentiate between aspects that are fly-by-night fads, versus short-term trends, versus long-term drivers of social change. This differentiation of trends is a basic tool that futurists use to surmise the emerging directions of anything from businesses to social groups to civilizations.

I guess if I’m going to talk about a futurist perspective on cultural trends related to The Golden Compass, I’d better define/describe what I mean. Here’s the espresso version from my glossary.

Futurist. Technical term for someone who uses at least these three skills in strategic foresight: (1) Differentiation of cultural trends into fads (low impact, generally two years or less), short-term trends (medium impact, generally up to about 25 years), and long-term drivers of change (high impact, generally 50 years or more). (2) Non-linear extrapolation of trends (using a mind-mapping style process to generate data for discerning patterns and integration points surrounding a particular issue or question). (3) Scenario writing (creating storylines that capture the emotional context and consequences of what the differentiation and extrapolation data show about plausible futures). For a basic introduction to the field of strategic foresight and studies of the future, see The Art of the Long View by Peter Schwartz. Christian futurists add another skill: (4) Assist disciples in discerning among what are merely plausible futures [note the plural], and choosing and pursuing the most preferable Kingdom future [singular]. Many other kinds of Christian leaders are either self-titled futurists or so called by others. However, it is probable that they function in a more general role as an innovator, prophet, entrepreneur, semiotician, symbologist, cultural analyst, social change agent, or such like – not a futurist in this technical sense. [Added 12-05-07.]

Now for a somewhat longer version of the “differentiation of cultural trends” with a real-world culture-crud illustration, and then on to some futurist trend applications to The Golden Compass.

FUTURIST TO THE MAX

“So what’s a futurist?” That’s the question that was at the core of a presentation I first did, oh, about five years and 15 minutes ago (props to Andy Warhol) for the Historical Society at the seminary where I then worked. During my preparations for that talk, I concluded that futurists are indeed a type of historian. In fact, I suppose you could consider us as sort of an odd combination of:

  • Speculative historians who write from a similar riff to the twist of terms “speculative fiction” for “science fiction.” We spin out scenarios of where the future could plausibly go, based on the realities of past and present.
  • Cyberpunks who write primarily futuristic noir fiction that is actually about present times.
  • Macrohistorians who offer multiple interpretations for the same set of historical events, based on different ways of looking at patterns in historiography (e.g., history as linear, history as non-linear or cyclical or whatever). (Sidenote: Not everyone believes in the Hegelian Dialectic as the way history works, yuh know.)
  • Archaeologists of the present (a title I coined for my presentation) who use highly developed cultural intuition to try to dig through very light layers of dust on current culture-crud items, and discern/speculate how important such artifacts may prove to be 5, 10, 25, 50, or 100 years from now.

I’ve always been fascinated by archaeology. In fact, when I was in second grade, the teacher gave us the assignment to think about what we wanted to be when we grew up, and then share two or three sentences about that in front of the class later that week. When my turn came, I declaimed: “I want to be a classical archaeologist, because I like Greek, Roman, and Egyptian history.” (Sidenote: It may have been around the same time that the teacher talked with my parents. “WE have a ‘problem,’” she told them, and they worked together to figure out stuff to keep me busy in class …) (More sidenote: The last thing I ever remember dressing up as for Halloween as a kid was Julius Caesar.)

Anyway, back to the seminary seminar. To illustrate the analogy of futurists as archaeologists of the present, I donned my pith helmet (depicted in the futuristguy blog masthead photo!) and entered the cultural jungle of eBay to dig around and see what I could find in the recent remains of one of my favoritest cultural icons: Max Headroom!

In case you don’t know who Max is, he’s the mid-1980s TV series virtual download head-plus-brain version of a 24/7 vid-journalist named Edison Carter, who broadcasts the news as it is happening, but is being chased by some bad guys, and when he tries to ride a motorcycle out of a parking garage he goes underneath a warning sign about a low maximum headroom, but he hits it and has to go to the emergency room and they aren’t sure he’s going to make it, so they download his brain into a computer so at least that part of him will survive, and it shows up in the head-and-shoulders character Max Headroom who virtually stutters with every flicker and flutter in the TV’s fluctuating electric power. (P.S. Edison still has his brain fully intact when he wakes up in the hospital; the download didn’t offload everything!) And oh, my goodness, the eBay goods I found on Muh-Muh-Muh-Muh-Max! Do this for yourself over a period of a month or two, including “Complete Auctions” searches, and you also are likely to view such maximally kitschy stuff as:

  • Air fresheners in the shape of Max or the yellow-and-black-striped Max Headroom warning sign.
  • Skateboards, backpacks, book covers, lunchboxes and thermos sets, and other essential school supplies for Max impact.
  • Trading cards and Christmas cards, posters and photos, books and bumperstickers.
  • Records and TV episodes laserdiscs and VHS tapes, and LPs with Max singing with or introducing The Art of Noise, Tina Turner (?! on the “Break Every Rule” laserdisc album), etc.
  • Fanzines, and probably secret Mary Jane fan-fiction and slashzines. (Make that cyberslashzines.)
  • Mock Max interviews, TV reviews, and Mad Magazine parodies of Max HR.
  • T-shirts and towels, pins and puzzles, watches and wall hangings.
  • Puppets, masks, sunglasses, and costumes.
  • Max soda cups, Max mugs, plastic Max heads for holding candy, and were there perhaps even Max popcorn boxes?
  • And lots and lots of Coca-Cola memorabilia, as Max was their spokes-m-m-m-m-man for about 2.7 years (or less). Sadly, his star faded. Or would that be, his electron stream stopped?

Certainly this was enough materiel to demonstrate the differentiation of socio-cultural trends! After all, there happens to be a lot of vantage that comes from vintage … but what exactly was it that I learned and discerned from such a wide array of concrete culture crud, its underlying concepts, and the surrounding zeitgeist context in which all this material was buried?

Fads – These are the shooting stars of trends: a quick burst of energy that is flashy and splashy, but then is completely burned out with basically no lasting influence or impact (other than on the mostly unnecessary expenditure of natural resources to make these things).

Taking it to the Max with fads: Umm … vinyl decays, candy gets stale, plastic pits, cards corrode, air fresheners fade. It should be apparent that these items in and of themselves have little lasting importance – except perhaps as sources of retro-fun.

Short-Term Trends – These are people, concepts, and practices that have moderate influence for at least 5 to 10 years, and generally more like 25 years. These days, generational influences might fall into this category more often than not, as many things change now more quickly. For instance, I recall the heady days of the mid-1990s when the internet was really starting to roar into orbit. Those who created websites were generally in their mid- to late-20s, perhaps even older. By the early 00 decade, fifth graders (i.e., 10- to 12-year-olds) were doing websites as school assignments. (Sidenote question: Is there a Baby Einstein Womb Website Builder Umbilical CD/program yet?)

Taking it to the Max with short-termer trends: In my research – yes, I’m talkin’ SERIOUS research on Max Headroom! – I ran across the fact that Max was the first major/featured computer-generated character on television. And while that is an important trend with quite some sticking power, it’s not so likely to change everyday life, though it was definitely a marker of dramatic changes in the field of entertainment, and CGI characters can pop up anywhere, anytime in visual media.

Drivers – These are long-term influences – people, concepts, and practices that permanently redirect the course of a “tribe,” society, nation, or civilization. Once a driver is introduced and takes hold, things will never again be what they were before. There is a long-lasting change that affects peoples’ lives in very substantial ways.

Taking it to the Max with drivers: Perhaps the most sociologically significant trend found in the Max Headroom TV series had nothing to do with Max directly, but with his human source and counterpart, videojournalist Edison Carter. Because Edison’s goal is to be on the scene when “news” is happening, the lines eventually get blurred and you have to wonder if the newscasters have actually become the newsmakers. Where is the dividing point between observer and observed, between creator and created? Max Headroom appeared during the mid-1980s, the era when C-Span got rolling, and round-the-clock news (or, should I write that as “unfiltered information” instead of news?) as becoming prominent.

Max Headroom didn’t cause this change toward inundations of unfiltered 24/7 information, but this show was one of the very first (if not the first) to do a riff on the change in such a way that it became really noticeable. And this blurring between news makers and news producers has significantly changed for the long haul the ways news is viewed. Similarly, there has been a blurring between data and news, between the reality of mere presentation being portrayed as giving perspective when in fact there is no time to process such streams of data-bits.

It is more than ironic that the first thing Edison researches and reports on are “blipverts” – hyperspeed advertisements that appear on TV with the entire content packed into mere seconds. Oddly, some people in this couch-potato, TV-addicted society explode to bits after absorbing too many blipverts. How different is that from “compassion fatigue” that happens from our hearing data-bits from around the world about disasters, wars, and evil inflicted by humans on one another? When we absorb so much that we can do nothing about but pray, how do we have any compassion or energy left for the situations where we could make a difference? (My solution: Avoid extended viewing of hypernews programs and sites, lest exposure become explodesure. Connect with local needs instead. Make a difference where I can instead of worrying about where I can’t.)

Anyway, these changes in news seem to have changed for the long term how the entire news and political and entertainment industries are done. New programs and data-tidbits must be generated constantly to keep up with the supposed public demand for information. What might we be doing in our churches that is the equivalent, and is that actually healthy?

A FUTURIST LOOK AT CULTURAL TRENDS IN *THE GOLDEN COMPASS*

Trends – especially drivers – create the unique context into which The Golden Compass film was produced and distributed. I’d like to suggest three drivers that contributed toward this being a fortuitous time for this film to be made:

  • The fantasy and speculative fiction (sci-fi) genres have become significantly more prominent.
  • People’s processing styles have moved toward more complex, epic-length stories and related experience-based identities.
  • More movies have specific spiritualities or philosophical bases that they promote – or attempt to deconstruct.

These all provide the context in which we must place The Golden Compass film and Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials book trilogy. I see them as poised at the overlap of these three trends.

Long-term driver #1 – Shift toward imaginative genres: fantasy and speculative fiction. There has been an ongoing shift from the realm of the mind to that of the imagination. (Remember the quote from A.J. Gossip in Part 3 on Learning Styles?) Personally, my current perspective is that the imagination is more tied in with hope than is the mind. Scientists are being replaced by storytellers. The mind and its products of science, technology, and even social engineering used to be king in the domain. Now, it’s imagination and its products of sci-fi/speculative fiction, fantasy, and personal and social experiences through actual or implied role-playing. There are multiple forms of concrete (physical) media and multimedia that require the imagination to fill in images for or interludes in the storytelling. Think about how the imagination gets engaged in such media forms as:

  • Trading card games
  • Films
  • Books
  • Comics and graphic novels
  • In-person role-playing games, fan conventions, and historical re-enactments
  • On-line massively multiplayer games

I suspect that the most imaginative people will become the leaders and misleaders at the emerging cultural edges. So, it is important to consider how imagination is portrayed as used for good and evil in Scripture, its relationship to hope and passion in moving toward a plausible or preferable future, how it functions, and how God may overrule “vain imaginations” to bring forth good and perhaps even overrule constructive imaginations to allow evil to persist for reasons beyond our comprehension. If you want a mind-blowing explanation for how the imagination, the brain, and perception work together in the participant “co-creating” the experience with the author/artist/developer, read Scott McCloud’s book Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art (Kitchen Sink Press, 1994). (Sidenote: I hadn’t thought about this book in a while, but it came up in a conversation today. Was that providential or what?! P.S. Shout-out to Dr. Jimmy, and thanks for the remembory!)   

Ultimately, it seems that hope is being lived out through adventurous storylines that simulate new situations which give us vicarious experiences. (And perhaps we also simply dissociate from our stresses through escaping to worlds beyond our present.) Whether these new worlds are utopian or dystopian, centuries ago or millennia ahead, they present their lessons to those willing to let their imaginations speed beyond the sound barrier and soar unhindered in the stratosphere.

I don’t think this change is due only to the advent of computer graphics, although that does make fantasy and futuristic settings increasingly more believable as time goes by. At this point, I suspect it is a flowering of complexity due to previous repression from the reductionism of rationalism and scientism in recent modernist decades. The imagination was not meant to be repressed, nor were any other aspects of our immaterial being: mind, emotions, soul, or will – although I do believe that all of these do need to be bounded to some degree. Freedom does come with responsibilities, after all, and unbridled being becomes about power instead of about loving-kindness and service.

Long-term driver #2 – Shift toward epic-length stories and experience-related identity groups. While the genres of interest have been changing, so too have been the attention span and the depth of intensity required … at least for those who become passionate about this story, or that character, or the other game that lasts for many hours. Although this is happening with other genres – e.g., American Idol (reality TV where the story unfolds over an entire season), 24 (real-time crime/action-drama), Bones (dramedy with strong character development that cross-connects in multiple character arcs) – it does seem that the fantasy and sci-fi fans have led the way.

Maybe genre, attention, and intensity constitute a three-fold cord that is not easily broken, as they do seem interwoven. So now we find fan groups who dote on epic films or such equivalents as multi-episode TV series, ongoing online games, long series of manga graphic novels, or huge comic book character series. (Sidenote: And how often have linear people labeled non-linear people as ADD/ADHD when in fact, the possibility of intense focus may have always been there, but not in the usual realms that were acceptable to linear-oriented people?!) Just for fun, check out these case studies and/or documentaries on fantasy and speculative fiction fans who transform their chosen stories into their framework for life:

Imaginative and epic material tend to be more complex. Unlike episodes that resolve in 26 minutes or less, depending on the number of ads in a half-hour, epics involve far more development of characters and plot. This allows readers-viewers-players to put themselves into the story and reflect on it more. (Sidenote: Here’s a wonderment … I wonder why, if we have the best story in the universe, we haven’t made it available in very many imaginative retellings …)

This is why I think epic storylines like The Lord of the Rings and Chronicles of Narnia (and maybe even some literary-critical recasting of Harry Potter series) can find uses as imagination-based metaphors for biblical truths. The actions of various agents, plus the consequences that ensue, offer frameworks for thinking about our own lives. And hey, this is nothing really new. Aesop’s fables, the fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm, and Sufi stories were all doing this centuries ago. When will we get on board this long-term trend by supporting imagination-driven disciples who have a passion for glorifying God through producing artistic media that ultimately offer a Kingdom-Culture vision of the future?

Long-term driver #3 – Shift toward movies motivated by spiritualities and philosophies. Not all epic stories are fantasy or sci-fi, and I think we’ve also been seeing another version of the epic, based in a distinct spirituality or philosophy. Some of these have epic length (often trilogies), others have epic scale with huge production values. Some are based in Eastern beliefs, others in Western traditions. Some attempt to be “pro” something, others “con.”

Since the 1980s especially, there have been many films that wouldn’t qualify as epic in proportion, but still provide an alternative perspective of imagining the world as it is, or was, or could be. But their core is a particular set of spiritual or anti-spiritual values, beliefs, and behaviors. Consider the following – and be sure to check out ALL the documentaries if they’ve got them – those are typically a most valuable source for perspective on that form of philosophy or spirituality.

Some of these may be far more disturbingly intense, violent, sensual, or spiritual than you want to be exposed to, so check out the descriptions at Amazon.com and/or the Internet Movie Data Base (IMDB) and decide for yourself.

Speaking of deciding for oneself, it seems to me that with the advent of The Dark Crystal in 1982, church-going people became far more interested in matters of movies. The Dark Crystal was released at a time when the current foment in the theological conservative churches was about the supposed infiltration of New Age philosophy into American culture and the churches. The same kinds of overall responses that we see now were in their infancy forms then:

  • Ban or boycott the movie.
  • Watch the movie anyway because the supposed problems are imaginary.
  • Watch the film yourself first and then decide whether it’s appropriate or not for (your) children.
  • Watch the movie with your kids or other people and exercise critical discernment to talk about what it means to live in a world where these perspectives will persevere.

I tend to go with a combination of the last two types of responses. With their huge images and heart-thumping music, movies are a powerful medium. I tend to be cautious about what I choose to see, and what I recommend to other people and why. I’ve become more sensitized in the past few years to caution in recommending various kinds of films to adults. So many of us suffered traumatic things as children that seeing parallel kinds of people or situations to those woundings can stir up harm. OR, perchance, they can be healing. OR, they can have different effects, depending. (For instance, I watched Saved! with a group of friends who had all been pummeled spiritually in superspiritual churches and ministries. I know people who are offended by the film, but the laughter at the ironies and absurdities was actually a healing experience for us! And afterwards, I could hear bits and pieces of processing among other people in the theatre.)

So, anyway, I tend to inform others who ask, weigh in on cautions about issues or characters that may stir up distress, and let people decide for themselves what to do. That approach is important for me to share for when I get into some review and interpretation of The Golden Compass in my next entry on the subject. But for now, time to tie up this post. I’ll close with a fun little DIY (do-it-yourself) section, and bid you adieu.

THE DO-IT-YOURSELF SECTION

1. Go on a Golden Compass “stuffari” on the web.

  • Do searches on The Golden Compass, His Dark Materials, Philip Pullman, and related topics. List stuff you find for sale on eBay. Watch the trailers and YouTubelettes you find on websites.
  • What is “meaningful” for cultural consideration? What do you perceive as important in what you are finding? What kinds of trends (fads, short-term, drivers) do you think may be embodied in these items?
  • If the film or related cultural-crud products were meant to be influencing readers/viewers toward atheism, how would you know? What clues would you expect to find in them? What would you look for, in terms of explicit messages? Implicit or more subtle messages? 

2. Go on a Christendom “stuffari” hunt.

If you think about it, Western Christendom as a cultural presentation of Christianity exhibits the same set of trends: fads, short-term trends, drivers of social change.

  • What do you think are some flash-in-the-pan people, places, and/or products that will have their 15 minutes of churchy fame and then be gone in flame?
  • What do you think will have an arc that peaks in significant influence for a generation and then fades?
  • What do you see as already having hit its apogee (peak) and is now in decline in terms of influence in Western churches?
  • What do you think is so longstandingly significant that it will outlast our lives and those of our children, grandchildren, and perhaps a few more grands- before it wanes into oblivion or a newer driver of social transformation overtakes it?
  • On what evidence do you sort out these trends into the category you selected for them?

3. Consider the idea of imaginative leaders.

  • “I suspect that the most imaginative people will become the leaders and misleaders in the emerging cultural edges.” How have you seen imaginative people be good leaders? Toxic misleaders? What do you think are their strengths and challenges, in comparison to traditional kinds of leaders? Is there a difference between an innovative leader and an imaginative leader?
  • Read Scott McCloud’s book Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art (Kitchen Sink Press, 1994) and/or The Prophetic Imagination by Walter Brueggeman (Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2001). How do these relate to the concept of imagination in leadership?

SIDEBAR: SUBCULTURES AS BAROMETERS OF FORTHCOMING SOCIAL CHANGE

Okay, so I was going to end with the DIY section. But I had this other sidebar material I wrote to go with this post, and I think I’ll put it here for now instead of posting it separately. It’s a related rant on Christendom churches and their leaders’ lack of watching culture. Enjoy …

The issue of drivers of social change is one of the reasons why I’m fascinated with the worlds of subcultures and virtual tribes – that is where the culturally creative edge occurs most frequently. In my mid-1990s writings on subcultural identity and virtual tribes, I first noted an important pattern – almost a sort of “formula.” My working hypothesis was that virtual tribes form around a distinct set of values that they cannot find elsewhere. Over time, that set of values filters into the mainstream culture, sometimes in forms that are more style than substance, but it gets there nonetheless. So, it seemed that if you can pinpoint when a “new” subculture emerges from the “underground” and becomes public, then add 15 to 20 years, you’ll see in more dispersed mainstream forms the same value set that catalyzed this tribe in the first place.

(Sidenote: If you know of anyone who has written about similar conclusions, I’d be interested in reading their work – please let me know! I did not get this myself from somebody’s book or lecture. I came to this conclusion on my own, based on “primary work” – making my own observations, coming up with theories for the similar patterns I noticed in multiple layers of cultural categories, testing the working hypotheses on similar other groups that I hadn’t studied originally to see how they fit, and adjusting the hypotheses for the next time. After all, my gifting is as a linguist, with the intuitive ability to see patterns among datasets. I was just writing a “transformational grammar” of how deep subcultural values translate into surface cultural expressions.)

So, if you know your coffee, the virtual tribe is like a shot of espresso: concentrated caffeine in a small container. The mainstream version is like Café Americano – a shot of espresso mixed into a large mug of boiling water. Same amount of caffeine, but diluted in a far larger container. Thus, if you consider it:

  • The early waves of so-called Generation X in the mid-1990s looked a lot like the punk culture that emerged in the mid-1970s, with a significant emphasis on independence and do-it-yourself.
  • The later Xers of the late ’90s and early ’00s had values more like those of cyberpunks, which emerged in the mid-1980s, with an emphasis on technology and changing the future.
  • The latest GenXers and early GenYers of the mid-00s are more like the eco-spiritual subculture that emerged in the early 1990s, with an emphasis on holistic/systems thinking and the importance of the natural world.
  • Because of increases in numbers of interracial and multicultural families, the middle GenYers of the 2010 decade may look more like the intercultural “Third Culture Kids” that emerged as a subculture in the mid-1990s. And so on.

There are all kinds of evidence points found in concrete cultural materials – games, TV shows, films, music, comics, etc. – that indicate changes in dominant social values. Do we want to learn how to read these signs of the times? Do we want to figure out how to respond? Are we willing to back up our response time so we see things and respond early/pro-actively instead of whenever the issue finally is “hot” and so our response is reactive?

Unfortunately, I can’t give very high marks to the American Church as a whole for our level of pro-active, constructive responses to changes in culture. The Christendom churches of the West are sooo very far behind the times. We look more at the culture inside our churches instead of outside in our communities, and our training programs don’t give us culture-spotting skills. (If you happen to know of any seminary or leadership program that requires all students to take courses in culture-reading and similar skills, please let me know so I can check it out!) This makes for a comfortable nest in which to rest. But it certainly doesn’t give us an understanding of the amazing providential moments where God is at work among both virtual and ethnic people groups outside the walls of the churches.

Or, we act as if we hear the culture readers, but we don’t really listen. It’s “The Cassandra Syndrome,” sadly, re-enacted all over again. In Greek mythology, Cassandra was gifted by the gods with prescience – not the ability to predict the future, but the ability to see the future. Meanwhile, due to a tiff with her god consort, she was cursed: When she forth-told the future, no one would believe her. Have we been doing that with our futurists, prophets, and discerners of the signs of the times?

Or, once we do look outside and see what is now “emerging,” culturally speaking, then that means we are actually already 15 to 20 years behind. This is precisely what happened with the American Church and “postmodernity.” By the time they caught on to the phenomenon, postmodern philosophies/values had already become rooted into the culture. Too late to stop the flow then … so the only thing left is to criticize, whine, and wonder.

Or, if we want to learn from this grand failure, and do something constructive, we could start questioning ourselves about how better to develop those who are gifted as culture readers, so they can forewarn us about plausible changes that will dramatically affect our futures.

End of sidebar, but not end of the discussion … 

Jump forward to Concrete Media Systems – The Golden Compass, Part 5, How to Conduct a Cultural Case Study. 

Jump back to Concrete Media Systems – The Golden Compass, Part 3, Learning Style Accommodations.