Friday, October 29, 2010

Living in a Dream World

    The movie entitled Dreamworlds III written and directed by Sut Jhally initiates the audience to enter a familiar territory of a popular media convention, music videos. The filmmaker took on the role of heavily relying on the use of perspective by incongruity. Throughout the course of the film there are displays of various music videos that Jhally alters the context of its presentation to exhibit a correlation between those videos and sexual violence. It is easy for most of us to concur that music videos are generally sexualized, but Dreamworlds attempts to bring out new perceptions on how a well-known form of entertainment effects our sexual and gender identities. There are specific strategies that Jhally decides to utilize to get his message across in an understandable and relatable fashion.
     One of the biggest strategies used in the film was that of re-narration. Jhally does a great job at taking a collection of videos and speaking to them with clear diction, conciseness, and a tone that the demands and keeps the attention of the audience. The video themselves already tell a story but through his narration, we are able to see a different perspective and take on the central messages and meanings behind them. At times he would show a clip of a video and then begin to narrate. Other times he relied on narration to foreshadow what was to come. The film itself was broken into different sub-categories, for example: Constructing Femininity, The Pornographic Imagination, Ways of Looking, and Masculinity in Control. Before each new topic was presented, the narration would shift to a constructed thesis being stated to prep the audience for what to expect next. By using his strategy with this certain narrative usage, the idea of engaging the audience is a minimal task to say the least.
    Another strategy that was greatly used is how Jhally contributes to making his theories and opinions more validated by how the film is compiled directorially. It is well known that opinions constantly fly around about the nature of music videos. However, someone simply stating that music videos are highly suggestive and portray women and men in negative aspects isn’t highly as effective as the way this film was directed. The film was directed in a way that as it was being narrated the music videos themselves were often slowed down, replayed, or even shortly paused to provide emphasis on various important points. This allows the audience to solely pay attention and take in the central messages through the delay of images being shown. Normally when a music video is watched in regular speed and in one viewing our interpretations are less likely to be fully developed and understood. Through the strategy of  the way Jhally chooses to display videos throughout the film, reflections and perspectives are more manifested in our cognitive awareness. 
    A very important strategy that was used in the film was Jhally’s ability to provide clear, vivid, and concrete examples to rationalize the arguments being proposed. For every argument that was presented there were at least five to ten examples provided in various videos. It wasn’t even in just one video in particular; the audience is able to see the same elements used in more than video. For example if the argument was made that music videos play on adolescents sexual fantasies there would be several clips of different videos that would display an array of the images of male fantasies shown in videos, such as nurses, police women, the role play of a school girl, and the demanding dominatrix. I believe his greatest achievement when displaying videos that supported his arguments is that he is able to show videos that crossed into different genres. He doesn’t just merely focus on the idea that most people have when they believe only hip hop videos are the blame for degrading women and setting the idea of femininity and masculinity in society. The film does a great job showing that this idea can developed been in all genres including pop, rock, and even country music.
    The strategies the filmmaker uses to the explore the idea of a “dream world” streamed through three to five minute music videos contribute to various feelings and emotions he is ultimately trying to bring out of his audience. Jhally’s narration for the film made his voice essentially be the soundtrack; to draw attention to the images contained in the video segments shown. The seclusion of images without their complementary sound creates a feeling of images alone are powerful enough to express moods and meanings. When there was other sound provided, it was small amounts of lyrics integrated as it became necessary to support an argument. For example he chose to insert specific lyrics of a Limp Bizkit song that highlight an ex-boyfriend’s rage and clearly express violent thoughts. Jhally believe that the way music videos are constructed might lead to the encouragement of others to evoke violent behaviors and take on the persona of the characters and images portrayed in music videos. He does a great job at providing real life examples of the aftermath of the effect that such ill thoughts and classifications can have on society. This is seen in incidents such as the one in Central Park where real women were openly violated and taken advantage of. Ending the film with rape statistics is another endearing strategy Jhally incorporates to ultimately have a lasting impression on his audience. He isn’t saying music video themes and elements themselves is bad, but that society needs to develop a narrative’s eye to see how the portrayal of gender roles in media ultimately effect us.

Text Messaging Gone Wrong

Maybe it's just my friends, but does anyone get the awkward text that reads "Call me" and when you call you ask why didn't you just call me in the first place? 


I dont know why this bothers me so much, but it ties in the my artifact selection when I go into how technology is ruining our social skills. I say this because when I ask different people why didn't you just call me in the first place, why did you send a text as if it were some sort of prompt or request. I usually get the following responses:


"Well I didn't want to call and you not answer"
It seems to me, like the more technological advance our world becomes the more methods people have to hide behind them. This to me sounds like a stretch to the fear of being let down, rejection. As if  the person would call and when they didn't receive a response, their whole life would be shattered. Come on!  Or is it that thirty seconds it took to get to my voicemail is a total waste of time that could of been spent updating your facebook, I dont get it. 


OR


"Well I didn't know if you were busy or could talk"
Again, what happened to the days before the world of text messaging when someone HAD to call to find out if someone was busy or not. There were no pre-calls to the call saying "Hey Im going to call you in thirty seconds will you be free"  No! You simply just called someone and if they answered you would be able to determine in in 10 seconds whether the conversation was going to go anywhere. Either directly by the sound of the speaker enlightened to hear from you and continues the conversation or indirectly by their distracted or monotone voice that lead you to presume the convo was dead from the start...


Maybe Im overreacting, maybe it is a good thing for both parties. Say you honestly dont want to talk to the person , you too can save face by letting them down with a quick text message back 


"Sorry...I have to umm,...wash my hair...."

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Ghost in a-Cyborg?

Ghost in a- Cyborg?

    What makes us human? What makes gender universally understood in social contexts? According to Donna Haraway, author of “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century,” gender, race, or class consciousness is an achievement forced on us by the terrible historica experience of the contradictory social realities of patriarchy, colonialism, and capitalism. After viewing the movie Ghost in the Shell, one can’t help but use Haraway’s ideologies in constructed their depiction and meaning of the movie itself. As a narrative critic, Haraway’s point of view and the movie makes me want to question whether humans truly do play a role in sexual differences that are seen in society.
    Haraway explains that a “cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction. Social reality is lived social relations, our most important political construction, a world-changing fiction.” To her, Contemporary science fiction is full of cyborgs - creatures simultaneously animal and machine, who populate worlds ambiguously natural and crafted. This can be definitely seen in viewing the movie, Ghost in the Shell.
    Ghost in the Shell takes place in 2029, a world where humans can “trade up” for cybernetic implants and prosthetics or “trade out” to almost full cyborg “shells” like Major Kusanagi. She is the cyborg section 9 leader is ultimately seen as God, for others to worship, in the movie. The movie is trying to highlight that the idea of becoming “ghosts in a shell” is culturally where we’re going. Cyborg is in a post gender role where gender is taken out of one’s cognitive reasoning. Haraway says, “The cyborg is a creature in a post-gender world; it has no truck with bisexuality, pre-oedipal symbiosis, unalienated labour, or other seductions to organic wholeness through a final appropriation of all the powers of the parts into a higher unity.”  In essence according to Haraway and Ghost in the Shell, we’re all cyborgs.
    As a narrative critic I could argue that it is true that socially we assign our gender roles in society. We assign masculinity and femininity through perception and we construct it through constantly living out the ideal of gender; in order to not break away from the stereotypical norm of what society says each gender entails. This is not natural according to Haraway and this can be argued either way. With a narrative critic’s mind frame, I could utilize Haraway’s ideas, as well as themes presented in the movie to form a possible conclusion on this idea.
    The Ghost in the Shell set up for explorations in various topics, ideas, and themes. One being of what does it really mean to be human? Or, in Haraway’s world, what is the significance of being “gender-blind?” To be human is it the definitive entity of a body of flesh, a consciousness, a soul, or “ghost”? If one’s body is entirely mechanical, can one still consider themselves human? In contrast to Haraway arguments, if a female’s soul was placed in a male’s body, or vice versa does the gender identity change or not? If one’s consciousness is active, yet their body is not present, do they essentially still exist? Lastly, a narrative critic could consider focusing on the thought of the idea that a gender free world may not necessarily be a good in reality. I’m almost positive there can be arguments in favor of gender roles in society serving as a positive element toward the functioning of human existence.

Friday, October 15, 2010

Ghost in the Shell

   This week we watched the movie Ghost in the Shell and I just wanted to discuss my thoughts, opinions, and whatnot on my take of the movie. At first, I found myself kind of lost to be honest. Im not really a big anime fan, so the thought actually being required to watch a movie of this fashion didn't quite thrill me. However I was pleasantly surprised what I attained from the movie when it was all said and done.
    The movie in ways makes you question what it means to be human, which leads me to think what does it mean to have gender completely define a person. We had a discussion where we touched on this a little bit, as far as this idea of a post-gender world. We essentially left on this idea that maybe a non-gender society isn't necessarily a good thing.  
    I believe that though often times ridiculous gender roles do serve somewhat has an appropriate function in society. Not only that but I dont remember who said it in class, but someone suggested that perhaps our gender roles per se are that of which come with some sort of programming issued in our DNA and I didn't really think about until now but I concur. I believe this could be a possibility. Though it too can be argued that we do create gender roles and stereotypes in society. Ah, Im torn on making a concrete stand on this..... what are your thoughts?

Thursday, October 7, 2010

The World of Music Videos

Today was music video day in class. Though I was looking forward to this after being told on Tuesday of what was to come, I soon felt ambiguity after class on how the class viewing and discussion went down. I don't know if I just get offended easily or what, but some of the comments that were made in class made me cringe with anger. I'm trying to stay open minded and accepts others views, but I felt like some were just so off the wall it was hard. I feel like what came out from our discussion was because we were literally analyzing part by part. I feel like if I were just to watch the same videos alone, I may have not developed the same conclusions as I/we did in class. Someone said that videos are promoting drinking and driving, but I never thought of that as a possibility until someone brought it up. I just can't fathom the thought of a responsible, mature, cognitively developed person watching a video and saying, "Gee that's so cool, let me go put someone's life at risk" but I guess that's supposedly what "they" are preying, the immature and weak minded. 
I decided to further look into this topic and I found an article that may interest others as well... I have provided the link below...


The Negative Effect of Music Videos

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Artifact Essay

This is just a ROUGH draft copy of my Artifact essay : / With so many thoughts and a lot to say, I hope I did my best to touch everything that needed to be said. Again, I stress, rough :)


“iPhorgot How to Communicate”

In society today, if you’re not up to date with the latest social propaganda, multi-ways of mass communication, or at least somewhat technology savvy, you’re probably living under a rock. This wouldn’t necessarily be seen as problem to some people except, “People more often than [ever] rely on texting, emailing, or “posting” to social sites, then actually meeting someone in person,” (Evans) or engaging in tasks that require face-to-face communication. This  can be unknowingly detrimental for our future. Technology, as a vastly growing movement over the years isn’t negative in itself per se, however, “As technology grew over the years, it enhanced everyone’s awareness of different ways of communicating [other than in person interactions] and at some point, became everyone’s ideal choice to talk to someone.” (Evans) I believe with the incessant rise in technology, there could be an inevitable destruction of face-to-face communication all together. 
It is very evident how much we value having instant access of all of our mass communication tools at the click of a button. This is shown through what our cell phones have been specifically designed to do. “Now the high tech phones aren’t even considered cool unless people can access their emails, update their facebook and twitter, and text (unlimited of course) with ease.” (Evans) This concept inspired me to choose an artifact and manipulate its originality with extreme exaggeration. I chose the iPhone and their very popular slogan, “there’s an app for that,” to influence my initiation on what I wanted to influence. I intended to show others that at the rate of how much value we place on having a multi ways to communicate with people, the basic way, traditional, old-fashioned, however one calls it, way of talking to someone face-to-face will ultimately fade away. I made an enlarged 3-D model of an iPhone, titled it “iPhorgot,” and put together several falsified apps. The title “iPhorgot” in lieu of iPhone, is representing those who will “forget” how to communicate without access to their phones and/or other forms of mass communication. Sadly, most of the reactions to the display of my artifact was mere hopefulness that one day some of my apps would be really obtainable. This lets me know that though I was stretching with my ideas, with the rise of the developments of technology anything is possible. 
Technology did not just spring up over night, and obviously it has been evolving since the beginning of man, but what grabs my attention is how it has grown throughout the course of my generation, specifically, the last decade. “Cell phones went from being a fairly expensive tool used by affluent people to becoming universal and a teenage fashion statement.” (Trenholme) Even in the beginning of popular usage of  cell phones, they were only made for the main purpose of making and receiving phone calls, but as we fast forward to present day, now phones can do that, and more. Besides the rise of cell phones attached to everyone’s palms, other sources of mass communication tools are also profoundly used, including emails. 
Email is “Among the many technological advances that [threatens] to crowd out the more intimate forms of interpersonal communication.” (Winnett) In an article titled “Is face-to-face conversation dying?” by Garth Roberts, the author writes about the time he was furious when he received an email instead of a traditional phone call; he had received a notice that a business contract he had for several years was not being renewed via email. He cried, “I worked closely with these people….I felt I should have received a phone call,” (Roberts) and I concur with his feelings. With something has important as business, where people’s careers and financial  assets are highly  invested, one would think that verbal communication would be greatly favored over any other method. Even though Harvard Business Review released a statistic saying, “78% of companies are using more electronic means to communicate with their staff,” every study Roberts has ever seen say “Face-to-face communication is the most effective method.” (Roberts) It is sad that even knowing this, we still hide behind emails and other forms of non-verbal communication. 
One of the biggest forms of non-verbal communication is the texting phenomenon that sparked greatly in the mid 2000s. Predominantly teenagers is where “Cell phones have become a vital social tool and texting the preferred mode of communication.” (Ludden) Texting allows for instant direct contact with someone  via one’s cell phone, without actually having to hear the other person’s voice. This may be a great way to send a message to someone if you favor the convenience of having a quick conversation, like maybe just one question or so. One will be able to do without actually having to engage in the strenuous act of being involved in a verbal, nonchalant,  and unnecessary conversation with someone. However, if people start using this quick, convenient way of communicating, where does the value of face-to-face communication stand?
In the article “Teen Texting Soars; Will Social Skills Suffer?” by Jennifer Ludden, teacher Nini Halkett is quoted saying, 
“[Students] can get up the courage to ask you for [a deadline] extension on the computer …but they won’t come and speak to you face-to-face about it. And that worries me, in terms of their ability- particular once they out in the workplace- to interact with people.”
This could very well be taken as just an opinionated statement that may or may not hold any hold validity whatsoever in the future, but “Teens admit they use texting to avoid confrontation or uncomfortable situations,” (Ludden) I can speak from personal situations and experiences with friends, and agree with this idea that it is often easier to escape humiliation or conflict by depending on text messages to convey your feelings. With one escape mechanism, however, leads to another. 
Who knew another escape mechanism from actually verbally communicating with people would come from a social website on the internet. The very popular site, facebook, began as place for students to share their daily life happenings and do exactly what they wrote in their high school year books, to “keep in touch.” The question today is, “Are social networking sites enabling interaction or reducing it to a escapist experience, displacing real interaction in [favor] of an alternative reality?” (Lecky) Nowadays people use facebook beyond it’s original purpose, which was to connect with people. It can be used to make one’s dating life easier; making relationships and ending them, your personal birthday reminder, enabling you to send your loved ones “Happy Birthday” messages, and sadly a great gateway to the world of cyber bullying, all of which were acts that were greatly better served in person or verbally. Essentially, facebook is upholding this idea that it is okay to deteriorate the fundamental beauty of personal, physical connectedness and relationships, by holding the progressiveness of technology on a higher pedestal.   
With the incessant rise in technology, there could be an inevitable destruction of face-to-face communication all together. There are too many outlets, sources, and options that are enabling people to escape reality at will.  Society has come to favor the idea of having access to mass communication at their finger tips, and thus avoiding face-to-face interaction. It is this reason why our social skills may continue to suffer since, “Having a real conversation has become an arduous endeavor [these days]” (Walsh) Technology advances are important to the betterment of society as a whole, because it enables us to move forward in our capabilities of national access, but when it tampers with having such a possible damaging effect on one’s social skills growth, there’s a problem. “It’s one thing to say that technology has simply progressed over the time, but  another to believe it could replace something that once upheld such value in relationships, hearing someone’s voice and spending time with friends and loved ones. I can’t say for a fact that our future depends on whether someone chooses to talk to someone in person or not, but when I find the answer, I’ll text you. 








































Works Cited
Evans, Jasmine. “My Artifact” Blogger. 27 August 2010. 17 September 2010.
<http://jasmine-please.blogspot.com/>


Lecky-Thompson. “FaceBook: Good or Bad for Communication. Looking at Effect of FaceBook on Face to Face Communication Skills.” Suite 101. 30 May 2009.
18 September 2010. 
<http://www.suite101.com/content/facebook-good-or-bad-for-communication-a121387>


Ludden, Jennifer. “Teen Texting Soars; Will Social Skills Suffer?” NPR Social Media. 
20 April 2010. 18 September 2010.
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126117811>


Roberts, Garth. “Is face-to-face conversation dying?” Instigating Change-One Mind at a Tine. 13 January 2010. 18 September 2010.
  <http://inspiredleaders.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/is-face-to-face conversation-dying/>


Trenholme, Sam. “Technology Changes in the 2000s.” MaraDNS. 10 January 2010. 
18 September 2010.
<http://maradns.blogspot.com/2010/01/technology-changes-in-2000s.html>


Walsh, Joan, ed. “The Lost Art of Listening: Communication is dying.” Joyonboard Blog. Open Salon. 12 July 2010. 18 September 2010.
<http://open.salon.com/blog/joyonboard/2010/07/12/the_lost_art_of_listening_communi cation_is_dying>


Winnett, Azriel. “Face-to-Face Encounters: A Dying Art?” Effective Communication. 
16 September 2005. 18 September 2010. 
<http://www.hodu.com/blog/2005/09/face-to-face-encounters-dying-art.html>