12/1 Pre Class Blog- Bourdieu and News

 “Our news anchors, our talk show hosts, and our sports announcers have turned into two-bit spiritual guides, representatives of middle-class morality. They are always telling us what we ‘should think’ about what they call ‘social prob” (Bourdieu)

This quote was the most impactful to me as I read through Bourdieu’s deconstruction of our media landscape. Though Bordieu wrote in a time before social media, many of his conclusions are still applicable to our modern media landscape. In this quote specifically, Bourdieu discusses how the masses only care about/ talk about the issues made aware to them by the media. I would take it one step further than what Bourdieu writes and say the news organizations itself. Depending on the program, news anchors, sports announcers, and talk show hosts don’t have control over what they talk about; the writers and producers do. I do agree that late-night Talk show hosts like Jimmy Fallon, Trevor Noah, and Lily Singh have more control over the material that they talk about. However, a normal news anchor does not have as much control over what they talk about.

Bourdieu’s idea connects back to Marx and Engels, who writes “Each new class which puts itself in the place of one ruling before it is compelled…to present its interest as the common interest of all the members of society… it has to give its ideas the form of universality (Marx and Engels). The news anchors, talk shows hosts, and sports announcers want us to be worried about what they are worried about. For example, American news stations will focus highly on American politics. Left-wing sources like CNN will focus on the problems/ corruptions in the Republican party and right-wing sources like Fox News will focus on corruption in the Democratic party. However, few news sources have covered the persecution and imprisonment of Uyghur Muslims and Christians in China. This issue is just as important (arguably more important) than some of the petty political squabbles occurring in the United States. But, we don’t talk about it BECAUSE our news anchors, talk show hosts, and sports announcers do not.

Picture of the "re-education" camps in China

Jane Denson, 11/19

        Last week's discussion of nostalgia, as mentioned by Jameson, got me thinking about the notion that we have nostalgia for not only the past, but also the present. In other words, we are missing something from our present, which would explain how pop culture texts from today draw upon the past. This sense of longing for what we used to have and attempting to recreate it in a way that fits into the mold of the present manifests almost everywhere. From my experience, I have seen this primarily through music and television. To add on to what talked about in class, I have observed this phenomenon in pop music the most, specifically from artists like Meghan Trainor and Lady Gaga. Trainor is often credited with a retro-futuristic style and sound, usually utilizing brassy horns (that are reminiscent of old jazz music) and fusing that sound with modern pop rhythms to produce what we know as "All About That Bass," for example. Lady Gaga, on the other hand, just released an album earlier this year called Chromatica, which appears to be nostalgic of the '80s with its electro-pop dance tracks, most notably "Stupid Love" and "Rain On Me." However, Jameson's ideas surrounding this topic are not limited to artists' music, since they even seep into their aesthetics too. Look at Ariana Grande for instance. I've noticed that some of her music videos, fragrance ads, social media posts, etc. appear to emulate or reflect the aesthetics of the 1940s-60s or late 1990s, which is so fascinating because I know she has nostalgia for pop culture during those eras and comes from a Broadway background where they were heavily appreciated. After observing all of the nods and homages to the past in practically every form of media, it becomes clear that we, as humans, tend to experience nostalgia rather naturally. Jameson's perspective on this matter certainly indicates that we indeed encounter present nostalgia, since it is so common to feel like a piece of the current moment is missing, which is never directly addressed by anyone.

Post Class Blog 11/19/20

     Today in class during our discussion of Fredric Jameson, we talked about the term “nostalgia.” We started out by defining nostalgia as a wishful longing for the past. This is the dictionary definition of nostalgia and what most people think of when they think of nostalgia. Jameson has a different approach to nostalgia and creates the idea of “present nostalgia.” Present nostalgia means that a person feels as if something is missing in the present. They are nostalgic for the thing that is missing. When thinking of the common definition of nostalgia, the media can create nostalgia for past places even if they have not been experienced by someone personally. An example that I brought up during class was Little House on the Prairie. When I was younger, I watched the show and read all of the books. I wished to be able to experience living back then. I was nostalgic for a past time period that I had not personally experienced, but wished to. The media creates nostalgia for the past, but also for the present. The media can make people nostalgic for the present by showing people what is missing from their lives. This is especially true of social media influencers. They present their lives as being perfect because of the material things they promote online. They come across as saying that if people just wear this or have this thing then their lives will improve. They make people think that material things are missing from their present lives and make them nostalgic for these material objects said to improve their lives. I have definitely had experiences where I think my life will improve if I mirror the lifestyle of an influencer. I believe what most people do not understand is that social media influencers only show us what they want us to see. They are not perfect because of the material objects they promote. We need to recognize this and not continuously become nostalgic for their lifestyles. We need to learn to be present without always wishing for something more or believing something is missing. It is okay to be nostalgic every once in a while, but it should not be a daily occurrence or people will never enjoy life.

post class blog 11/12

 The discussion of the democracy of the radio in class was really interesting to me. Radio held an important role in my grandparents or even my parents life. But in my current social circle most people that I know have abandoned the radio for the sake of Apple CarPlay where they can play whatever music they desire in the moment. It makes me wonder if the younger generations who are losing the importance of the radio are also losing the impact of that democratized reverent for a more individualized view on music.

Which then begs the question of where meaning comes from for the music if the community creates meaning and a community is no longer sharing the experience of radio play of songs? I'm not sure if I know the answer yet but it's an interesting line of thought.

Pre-class blog 11/19

“Another reason for the heavy weight given to official sources is that the mass media claim to be ‘objective’ dispensers of the news. Partly to maintain the image of objectivity, but also to protect themselves from criticisms of bias and the threat of libel suits, they need material that can be portrayed as presumptively accurate.”

Almost paradoxically, corporate news media claims to be objective while the general public claims it is too left leaning. If this were true, though, then a more overtly leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders would have done very well during this election cycle. Instead, popular media outlets preferred to talk about Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren, doing little to no work to battle the idea of Sanders as a radical leftist candidate. In reality, Sanders beliefs are not far off from what would be considered centrist in a Western European nation. He is far from the image of a totalitarian communist leader that popular right media endlessly peddled during his campaign.

The Overton window in America so far right, that anything a bit left of center seems radical. This is all part of the propaganda machine in America that keeps the corporations that own the media in power. By quashing anything that questions whether unfettered capitalism is the best way of handling our world, people will unquestioningly continue to put money in these corporations’ pockets. For instance, when solutions to the climate crisis are proposed, we often hear of individualized solutions, such as driving less, buying reusable products, buying products that are certified to be environmentally friendly, and using less electricity. What is rarely brought up is less suburbs to reduce driving, funding public transportation, and the idea that buying less things is already an environmentally friendly act in itself. Consumption is presented as the solution to every problem, from environmental crises to racism to exploited workers in 3^rd world countries. To solve racism, we are told to vote with our wallets and shop from businesses that supposedly promote equality (whether the efforts are truly there is not to be discussed). To help exploited workers, we just need to buy from brands that pledge to help the very workers they exploit. We are taught that we can shop and consume our way out of a crisis, when endless consumption is the primary reason we are in them.

11/17 Post Class Blog- Jameson and "New" Products

 

“Frantic economic urgency of producing fresh waves of ever more novel-seeming goods” (Jameson)

Today in class, we started to discuss the impacts of Jameson’s thoughts on our culture. Jameson discusses how we are always flooded with a collection of “new” goods in the market: new clothing styles, new cookware, new films. However, many of these “new” goods are recycled versions of what we already have, reinforcing a cyclical fashion.

His assertions connect back to Habermas and the concept of “cult of the new.” Habermas argues that we are drawn to new things, even if they are not truly new. The idea of the object being new is more compelling than an actually new.

As a consumer in the United States, I am constantly exposed to the “novel-seeming goods” in the marketplace. Activewear is a particular place that I shop in since I workout a ton. Brands like Gymshark and Lululemon will drop new collections, but many of the leggings they release are similar or even the same to what they have released before. There will be a slight tweak in the cut of the legging, the fabric, the seams or another small detail, and they will then re-brand the legging as something new. However, there is a lot of hype that goes around these releases, often leading to them selling out within the first day they are released. Though the leggings are not that different than what they already have, the novel value of these new leggings make consumers want to buy them. Gymshark will continue to release these new (but not really new) leggings because it works for them economically and they are able to market their new collections as selling out fast. Thus, the cycle of urgent continues to push Gymshark to make minor tweaks to their products, which then urges other companies to do the same.

One of Gymsharks' most popular leggings that has been re-released a couple different times

11/19 Pre Class Blog

 “A work of art has meaning and interest only for someone who posses the cultural competence, that is, the code, into which it is encoded. The conscious or unconscious implementation of explicit or implicit schemes of perception and appreciation which constitutes pictorial or musical culture is the hidden condition for recognizing the style’s characteristics of a period, a school or an author, and, more generally, fro the familiarity with the internal logic of works that aesthetic enjoyment presupposes.” (Bourdieu, 250)

This quote, as well as the reading, is talking about the gatekeeping that goes on within our culture. If you are not surrounded by a specific cultural artifact, then you might not have the cultural competence to understand it. For example, the theater is something that is considered very high culture in the United States. That is because the tickets for theater is often very expensive and inconvenient for many people. Thus, not as many low to middle-class people go to see performances. However, in the UK, theatre is much more accessible and seen as more of common art. Theatre in the UK is also federally funded, thus theaters are able to lower their ticket prices in order to have more people come and see shows. So, when people who don’t have access to these cultural artifacts, they don’t know how to “encode” the culture in front of them. The price, in essence, is gatekeeping theater from a mass audience. In Cinema and Modernism last semester, we discussed the concept of “high culture” and “Low culture.” What we deem as either of these changes as the cultural paradigm shifts. Though I argue that theatre is considered High culture in both the UK and the US, the theater is seen as a “higher” culture due to its lack of accessibility. 

Pre Class Post 11/17/20 N.S.

Herman & Chomsky write an eye-opening piece that goes beyond anything we could imagine in the United States. The land of the free? Who really knows? We are existing in a time where all of our decisions on a daily basis are completely being controlled and manipulated by the mass media. As the authors put it, "the media serve the ends of a dominant elite" (Herman, Chomsky, 2012, p. 204). This is entirely true due to the fact that politics in almost every country is driven by wealth, and wealth is the single key to power. Yes, people can use their voices and knowledge to obtain much power, but to make decisions, people must acquire an incentive, and a monetary incentive is as good as it gets for all parties involved. Thinking globally, people interpret the news "objectively" and sometimes remain an unbiased opinion. The only contingency to this is that the media has too many, "filters" as Herman and Chomsky put it. For the average American, most people are seen as either the middle or working classes. These classes and caste system are not fully educated on these media outlets that are being fed through them each day by deception. As a constant theme in this class, we understand the false realities of the 'free world' as we. know it. Media is one of the most profitable investments one can make at the starting point of the technological boom that arose in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and beyond. The exponential growth of basic media and news can reach every corner of the globe. Again, the point about this caste system in the U.S. is a major flaw that was basically started by the founding fathers who put certain people in power for exponential generations to come by this unforeseen domino effect. It almost seems as if we have new founding fathers (the 1%). These are the individuals are, "the large media companies all do business with commercial and investment bankers, obtaining lines of credit and loans, and receiving advice and service in selling stock and bond issues and in dealing with acquisition opportunities and takeover threats. Banks and other institutional investors are also large owners of media stock" (Herman, Chomsky, 2012, p. 208). Thus far I have really only discussed ties between banks and the media. I have not even scratched the surface of how governments interfere, intercept, and manipulate. This is another filter that is directly linked to the monetary filters. Policymakers need support and advocates and the media is how they manipulate the general population's minds on trying to understand what is in the majority's best interest or to rephrase what is in the best interest of the status of the government's reelection. Reelection is what gives the banks and other driving forces the incentive to make more due to the policies that are presented. The media should have an agenda that is right and fair for all classes and people that are embedded within the nation. There are enough manipulators and figure heads of corruption and deceit. How do we put an end to these systemic patterns? 

"This trend toward greater integration of the media into the market system has been accelerated by the loosening of rules limiting media concentration, cross-ownership, and control by non-media companies" (Hermand, Chomsky, 2012, p. 208). 

Evie, Herman & Chomsky

Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky explore the issues that arise from mass media in their piece “A Propaganda Hotel.” Mass media is controlled by systematic propaganda. On top of that, there is a “monopolistic control” over media which includes official censorship that serves the dominant elite. While the media may portray themselves as advocates for free speech and general interest of the community, they are in reality agents for propaganda. 

One point I found disturbing from this piece is that “These twenty-four companies are large, profit-seeking corporations, owned and controlled by quite wealthy people.” In this quote, Herman and Chomsky are talking about the media giants that make up the top tier of media companies in the United States. What is so interesting about this comment is that the wealthy owners depict what the media covers and that content is purely motivated by profitability. The more money one has, the more influence one has over what is being released to the general public. Since media is so prevalent in our day-to-day lives, this statement is highly concerning. 

In addition, “Large corporate advertisers on television will rarely sponsor programs that engage in serious criticism of corporate activities, such as the problem of environmental degradation, the workings of the military-industrial complex, or corporate support of benefits from Third World tyrannies.” Since money is so influential in the success of media corporations, advertisements are essential to the well being of a company. The fact that advertisers are more willing to sponsor light programs than serious or controversial ones is detrimental to our society. The media has a duty to our society to open our eyes to real world issues, however, we are instead fed material that has been filtered through wealthy, powerful people. Therefore, the dominant elite have the ability to control the information that we are being fed; media for the people has become an illusion as money governs what knowledge we have access to.

Jane Denson, 11/12

        Last class' discussion of the culture industry helped me better understand Horkheimer and Adorno's theories and place them in the context of everyday life in the eyes of the consumer. As someone who likes to question the validity or motives of the media, especially in regards to the entertainment industry, I am constantly wondering about what effects the sameness found within our culture has on the masses. From my experience, technology has stood out as such a prominent example of these theorists' ideas in motion. If you think about it, every type of technological invention, mainly cellphones and computers, is the same as the rival brand. What's interesting here is the word brand. While yes, every product is practically the same with slight variations, which goes across every competitor, it must be recognized that the branding each company manifests is crucial when attempting to achieve success. I've always noticed this with Apple and their variously new gadgets, as well as regurgitated devices (that come in all sizes). Clearly, their branding is powerful and tied to market share, in addition to image. Perhaps that's also why they offer multiple colors for their phones and cases. People want to see the Apple logo in divergent shades of each color. Horkheimer and Adorno's analyses provide so much insight into phenomenons like this one that bleed into every facet of consumerism in our capitalistic society. Going further, you could easily note that apps follow this same social paradigm and all copy one another with their designs/features. To illustrate this, simply look at how Instagram and FaceBook emulated Snapchat's "story" feature. This is one of numerous instances where the sense of "repackaging" is abundantly clear to consumers, yet they still buy into it. However, studies have shown the addictive nature of these apps and the impact they continue to have on one's psyche, which would adequately explain how easy it is for companies to fool us into engaging more with their repetitive goods that don't hold much substance. In retrospect, the culture industry is fascinating, yet arguably harmful to consumers, since the sameness it contains appears to infect our daily lives.

Post Class Blog 11/12

  “The schematic nature of this procedure is evident from the fact that the mechanically differentiated products are ultimately all the same” (Horkheimer & Adorno 55)

Through this quote, Horkheimer and Adorno argue that products that have the same purpose, but have slight differentiations are ultimately the same. They are saying that two products of different brands that have the same end result are interchangeable. The only difference between the two products is the cultural significance that society allocates to specific brands. With this point of view, there is actually no freedom of choice in choosing products because they are all ultimately the same. In class, we spoke about the example of cell phones. We named the various brands and differentiated them, but ultimately they are all the same. All cell phones have the same purpose of being a tool for communication. At their core, they are used for speaking to other people either over the phone or virtually using a messaging app. The difference between cell phones is the cultural significance that society gives to them. In today’s society, having an apple iphone is considered superior because society has deemed apple to be top of line. This occurs honestly in every product that is on the market. Another example is a Gucci purse and a Target purse. Both purses have the exact same purpose of being a bag to put stuff in. The Gucci bag is way more expensive and idolized because of cultural significance. People who have a lot of money or are famous tend to purchase expensive brands such as Gucci and are constantly photographed or seen out wearing the brand. These people have such high status in the eyes of the less rich classes and thus use their status to give cultural significance to a brand. The people idolizing these celebrities feel more secure about themselves when they are able to carry the more expensive brand over a more reasonably priced brand. I believe that we need to stop giving cultural significance to every product because all it is doing is further separating the social classes and making people who can not afford a certain brand feel less than. We should accept all products, name brand or not, because they all have the same purpose.

Post-class blog 11/10

The discussion of language barriers and ideology in class reminded much of my experience as a multilingual person. My parents are very intelligent people, but sometimes it doesn’t necessarily come through when they are speaking English. In America, how well someone speaks English is one of the most important factors when judging their intelligence, even if they speak another language. This makes many people speak down to them and treat them like children, because the assumption is that their accents mean that they can’t understand anything. Nevermind that they have advanced degrees and work as nurses in a hospital, the only thing that matters is their English language ability.

Traveling to other countries with tour groups shows how deep this assumption of English as an inherently superior, more intelligent language runs. About 4 years ago, I went in a group of exchange students to Japan. While there were a few people in my Japanese class with me, most of the group had almost no knowledge of the language. When we arrived, we stayed with host families in order to immerse ourselves more fully in the culture. The most common complaint I heard from the group was that their host families hardly knew any English, and that they would’ve rather stayed in a hotel. The lack of knowing English seemed to overshadow anything else that their families would do for them, like cook them meals, wash their clothes, provide them with baths, drive them to places, and a place to sleep. I suppose I have a biased view of this because I was able to speak Japanese with my family and the mother had quite good English as well, but it seems like they were ungrateful for how lucky they were to be in Japan. Most people would not be able to have the same experience they had, and the most important thing to them was that the citizens of a foreign country accommodate them and their linguistic shortcomings, rather than make an effort themselves.

Ashlynn 11/10 post class

 The discussion of mythologies as they pertain to culture was really interesting to me. Especially in regards to culture being a fixed point in time or in flux with the interests of people.

I studied Latin and Roman/Grecian culture for 11 years meanwhile, my father went to an all boys military school and so he knows a lot about war machines and he also loves race cars.

I admit that I have been rather elitist towards him in the past as I felt like I understood more information than him when visiting art museums and the like. However, I realize that should I visit a machinery involved museum, he would know much more than I did and the roles would be reversed with me suddenly becoming the uncultured half.

Culture as it stands does then change depending not the interests of the people I think. There may be cultures which have historically existed longer and therefor have more interest but there will probably be people hundreds of years in the future who have the same interests as my father and then it will be treated with some of the same reverence. Unless the reverent is lost at that point.

11/10 Post Class Blog- Hebdige

 “Ideology saturates everyday discourse in the form of common sense” (127)

Today in class, we discussed Hebdige and I thought he offered some very compelling thoughts on ideology. Hebdige is saying that we, as humans, are surrounded by hegemonic forces. These hegemonic forces assist in imbuing people with ideological views. Since these hegemonic forces are so dominant in our current society, these ideological views become common wisdom. For some ideological values, like not wanting to murder human beings or hurting other people, are morally good and I argue should always be upheld. However, the government (or those in power) will put other values in us that enforce ideology.

Currently, I am in a Political Media class with Dr. Schoen. The more I think about that class and CMC 300, the more crossovers I see between our theorists and our contemporary times. In that class, we just finished talking about how political advertisers will use emotions to control the anxious thoughts of the people listening. In one of the documentaries we walked to (called “The Century of the Self”), there is a heavy discussion of Edward Bernay, who was an American propagandist during WWI. He, as well as other propaganda creators, were able to circulate the typical American ideology around President Woodrow Wilson. In essence, propagandists like Bernay take Ideology and elevate it so it is appealing to the masses. Even things that we wouldn’t expect to “ideology” or “propaganda” are considered that. For example, the idea of a “perfect American breakfast” is bacon and eggs. Why is it bacon and eggs? In the 1920s, Bernay was approached by a pork producer who wanted to increase the profit on their bacon. Bernay asked a “doctor” if Americans need a heavier breakfast. That “doctor” in turn asked other doctors and Bernay now had a “study” in which doctors recommended a heavier breakfast, specifically bacon and eggs. Even our notions of what breakfast is act under an ideology.

Post Class Blog 11/10

 “The best that has been thought and said in the world” -Arnold

“Ordinary behavior”- Williams

Hebdige brings in these two quotes from Arnold and Williams to help explain two different definitions of culture. Arnold has a historical and unchanging understanding of culture, while Williams has a postmodern and ever changing view of the meaning of culture. Arnold believes that culture has a classic view culture meaning he believes that culture is defined by the past and will always be defined by it. Williams believes that culture changes alongside and coincides with the developments of society. I agree with both Arnold’s and Williams’ definitions of culture. While I believe that culture is influenced by the classics of the past, I also believe that the past does not solely define the present and culture is constantly changing. I believe we can see this in the development of new technology. In the past, society has not been centered around technology and everyone was more focused on their own lives. Times have changed however and culture has evolved alongside the advances in technology. People’s lives revolve around technology and the need to know all information via the media. Most every person who is of an age to have a cell phone has one. The culture of the world has changed due to the technology of cell phones. People have started to structure their lives around virtual worlds offered through the technology. The culture of being present with the people around you is shifting to a new culture of connecting via the internet. While this can be negative because people are less engaged in real life, it can be beneficial for people to meet people they would have otherwise not gotten the opportunity to meet. Technology is one of the many factors that contribute to an ever changing culture.

11/10 Pre-Class Post

This week's reading offers a lot of intertextualities, specifically, between Horkheimer & Adorno, while many connections with Walter Benjamin. This validity of this connection comes from, The Age of Mechanical Reproduction. We are experiencing a time in the world that is quite paradoxical with the overflow of repeated and constantly reproduced information. One point Horkheimer imposes is the automobile industry as there is an amazing ray of options. 'Options' is the keyword that gives leaks the realm of capitalism and exposes how wealth has driven way too many global economies. This inherently exposes the message of the essay, which is, Mass Deception. The idea that we might feel like actors or actors in this age of capitalism and the cycle of trying to fully understand the media and how to feel full fulfillment. Horkheimer & Adorno say, "In reality, a cycle of manipulation and retroactive need is unifying the manipulation and retroactive need is unifying the system ever more tightly. What is not mentioned is that the basis on which technology is gaining power over society is the power of those whose economic position in society is the power of those whose economic position in society in society is strongest" (Horkheimer, Adorno, 2012, p. 54). This quote truly reinforces the manipulation aspect that technology and artificial intelligence can be more in control than the biological living organisms that inhabit this planet. Horkheimer brilliantly puts it, "Everything comes from consciousness" (Horkheimer, Adorno, 2012, p. 55). This ideology gives us choice or at least the depiction in which it seems like we have a choice. This reading allowed me to deeply understand the overall purpose of culture and our existence in society means. 

Thought-Provoking Quote: "All mass culture under monopoly is identical and the contour of its skeleton, the conceptual armature fabricated by monopoly, are beginning to stand out. Those in charge no longer take much trouble to conceal the structure, the power of which increases the more bluntly its existence is admitted. Films and radio no longer need to present themselves as art. The truth that they are nothing but business is used as an ideology to legitimize the trash they intentionally produce" (Horkheimer, Adorno, 2012, p. 53). 

Evie, Horkheimer & Adorno

 “Culture today is infecting everything with sameness”

In “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception,” Max Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno critique popular culture due to its “sameness.” They argue that the sameness of the industry serves as a mechanism of control over our society. The products of the cultural industry appear to be art, but they are regulated by money and power. Therefore, all products are designed for profit. This commodification of culture controls our consciousness. For example, the “easy” entertainment we view in society serves as a distraction from the wrongs present in our day-to-day lives. Distraction is incredibly dangerous; we are constantly unconsciously conforming.

The cultural industry maintains its power through style and form. “Something is provided for everyone so that no one can escape; differences are hammered home and propagated.” Horkheimer and Adorno explain this concept through the example of cars. There are different types of cars on the market and endless gadgets you can add to cars to make them “unique.” However, in reality, all cars are just variations of the same thing. They are all simply road vehicles used for the same purpose. The industry creates variations for us to pick and choose from so that we feel in control. This sense of control is in fact an illusion.

Horkheimer and Adorno also use the example of movies with recycled plots, but different actors. We get excited when we see a “new” movie come out with eye-catching stars. What we fail to recognize is that the new actors just serve as a distraction from the fact that there is nothing really “new” here. This may be the easiest genre to pick on, but how many Romantic Comedies have you seen where the two main characters meet, part ways due to some obstacle, then realize their true love for one another and end up happily ever after? The culture industry is defined by sameness that we cannot escape.

Jane Denson, 11/5

        Last week's discussion of Poster and Jenkins' theories got me thinking about participatory culture and the growing reality of Postmodern Virtualities. As a member of our current generation, I am genuinely intrigued by the notions presented by these two theorists. During our class dialogue, I found it interesting that people my age don't consider previous technological inventions (e.g. the telephone) to be technology, since we have been greatly conditioned by them from an early age to accept them the way they are. Going back to Poster, his analysis of simulative reality certainly makes me wonder about our current world's direction into a (purely) virtual realm. This opens up the question: Is virtual reality better than real? My answer is a mix, simply because while yes, virtual reality is under our very own control to reflect a fantasy or ideal scenario, it can also be quite dangerous, since it allows us to become vulnerable to losing our sense of self. Not only that, but I believe Poster's theory additionally suggests that this increasingly prominent phenomenon of simulative experience can gradually desensitize us to real-life horrors (e.g. violence and death). Look at video games, or even the news. The over-abundance of graphic imagery used to display violent behavior, harsh victimization, intense fear, etc. contributes to this overarching essence of desensitization due to the fact that viewers or players (and their senses) are constantly bombarded by it.

        To give an example from my life that pertains to Poster's notions, I play a survival horror game that entails escaping one of many malevolent killers who are attempting to sacrifice you to a higher being. It's an online multiplayer game that features a vast array of lore, visual effects, sounds, etc. to fully immerse the player in the eerie landscape of each individual trial. As a result of having the game for two years and playing for a total of 3,000+ hours, I would argue that I am completely desensitized to the violent type of activity within this virtual world, which ranges from being slashed, to being shot at, to being ripped apart. In retrospect, games like this one, of course, tie into Poster's theory, but they also relate to Jenkins' too. Here, it can be noted that because this virtual reality is online and involves interacting with other people in real time, it does indeed echo Jenkins' discussion of tapping into the shared framework of popular culture (i.e. the game itself, the horror genre, etc.) to foster connectivity between players and facilitate like-minded communication. I can safely say that I have made better friends recently through the virtual realm than the real one. Below are a couple of images from the game I play, Dead by Daylight.

Response to UR's Pre-class Blog 11/5

 

I was unable to attach this photo in my comment on UR's post, so I thought I'd share it here. Here are the two fast fashion brands that came up when I searched Japanese Lolita fashion:

Pre Class 11/5

Generally we associate value to something based on the meaning it has to the individual. This is the ebb and flow of society. We will always have push and pull with all entities that are apart of society and culture. Culture must be read from a worldly perspective as a starting point to gauge, compare, and add or take away meaning. Specifically, this notion that Barthes has on reading culture, “The implicit assumption that it still required a literary sensibility to ‘read’ society with the requisite subtlety, and that the two ideas of culture could be ultimately reconciled was also, paradoxically, to inform the early work of the French writer, Roland Barthes, though here it found validation in a method-semiotics - a way of reading signs” (Hawkes, 1977, p. 126). This quote is quite profound in the sense that the readability of anything is crucial  to understanding the needs, wants, and desires to control the flow of hegemony and the inherent importance and impact the tone of culture has. Culture has so many external pressures and influences based on the country where one is trying to gauge and understand culture. As Hebdige brilliantly states, “You cannot learn, through common sense, how things are: you can can only discover where they fit into the existing scheme of things” (Hebdige, 2012, p. 125). This quote speaks miles ahead of its time. This is an extremely honest sentence because the everything must have context to associate its meaning and this sentence feels like it trying to do exactly that. Below I have shared an excerpt from Hebdige that I through the was quite profound.  

“Williams was, then, proposing an altogether broader formulation of the relationships between culture and society, one which through the analysis of ‘particular meanings and values’ sought to uncover the concealed fundamentals of history; the ‘general causes’ and broad social ‘trends’ which lie behind the manifest appearances of an ‘everyday life’” (Hebdige, 2012, p. 125).  

Post Class 11/3

From this reading selection, many new concepts and connections came forward and became clear. The fact of the matter is that these theorists and ideologies have shaped and influenced the world as we clearly perceive it to be. Marx has some extremely interesting commentaries on society, specifically, the notion of false consciousness is the worlds best and biggest illusion. The way in which we perceive the world and ourselves have inherent bias and by nature we all look out for our best interests and the interests of the people we spend time with. We are living in a well-oiled machine. My home nation being, The United States of America has the biggest false reality towards society. We are all actors and puppets controlled by the mass-media making everyone decision for us (unconsciously speaking). We face decisions on a day-to-day basis that goes right over our heads. The mass-media tries to regulate and control our happiness to a certain extent so there can be law and order. These are the basic fundamentals and building blocks that hold checks and balances for the remainder of society, leaving out those in power who are the puppeteers. Marx describes the mass-media as a point of deception to uphold the working class from straying away outside of the false reality. Ideologies are merely lies that help us on a day to day that reinforce our beliefs and the beliefs we are being fed by all outlets. Below, I have selected a quote that truly felt powerful and helped me make all these connections.

“Since then, with the development of mass education, forms of parliamentary democracy and, in the twentieth century and twenty-first centuries, the mass media, the social control of thought has become of major political importance, and with it, the question of ideology. Definitions of ideology have spread in widening circles, from a local concern with the ideologies of groups in a conjuncture, to those of a period, an epoch and, especially since the success of the great post-war movements against European imperialism, a sense of ideology as perhaps characterizing the whole of Western culture since Ancient Greece” (Marx, p. 33). 

Pre-class Blog 11/5

“However, the challenge to hegemony which subcultures represent is not issued directly by them. Rather it is expressed obliquely, in style.”

 

One of the most interesting subcultures I’ve encountered is the Japanese Lolita fashion scene. While the name is shared by the Vladimir Nabokov’s novel, the origin of the name Lolita in Japanese fashion is highly debated among the community. Some say it was picked arbitrarily as a pretty, flowery, Western sounding name, while others theorize that it was originally a derogatory term for the community that was reclaimed (much like Goth and Punk). In either case, the community is known for its ostentatious dresses and hairstyles, almost overly performing femininity. These dresses and headpieces are made by members of the Lolita community for members of the Lolita community, going against mass produced clothing and creating something themselves. While the style may appear oppressive to Westerners, it is not meant to be appealing to men. Showy clothing and hair go against the demure ideal of femininity forced upon women in Japanese society and makes a statement about how girls are expected to grow up much quicker than their male counterparts. By performing a childhood fantasy, they are retaking parts of their childhood taken from them by society.

 

Due to the proliferation of Japanese pop culture, this style has also become popular outside of Japan, with Lolita communities existing all over the world. Removed from its culture of origin, I wonder if the fashion loses some of its edge. The symbols probably do not carry the same meaning that they do in Japan, and if anything, come off as conservative and homely. Without this cultural context, Lolita becomes aestheticized rather than a political statement. There is nothing wrong with enjoying a particular fashion style, but it is important to know its significance and origins as well. Especially with fast fashion becoming more and more preferred to these often expensive custom alternative fashions, this is one of the ways to keep the spirit of it alive.

Post Class Blog 11/3

 

“Postmodern culture is often presented as an alternative to existing society which is pictured as structurally limited or fundamentally flawed.”

 

Mark Poster writes this quote in Postmodern Virtualities. He is arguing that the postmodern culture having to do with virtual reality is being considered as an alternative to the reality of the world. He is offering the claim that virtual reality is better than real. He believes this because he thinks that humans have more control over virtual reality than true reality. Poster understands virtual reality as being able to be dominated by humans because they are able to decide the details of a virtual world. This connects to Baudrillard’s idea of the simulacra because he believes virtual reality is just a representation of real life and is not real. When I think of humans having more control over virtual reality, I immediately think about social media. Social media users are able to control the image they broadcast to the world. People have the ability to edit or photoshop images and have the freedom to say what they want about themselves online. This happens a lot with celebrities. The Kardashians are major social media users and post frequently. Their posts frame their lives to be perfect. They edit their photos to achieve the “perfect” body and appearance and only regularly share about the luxurious parts of their lives. They do not open up online as real people, but rather portray themselves as an image of perfection in the media’s eyes. They have complete control of their image via their social media. They have taken control of their own virtual reality. Virtual reality has the ability to be positive when it allows people to experience things virtually they never would have gotten to before. It can be negative when it affects the real world so tremendously, it is hard to decipher what is real and what is not. I believe that virtual reality is not always better than the real and we should yes partake in these awesome experiences, but also not lose sight of the real us.

11/5 Pre Class Blog- Hebdige, Subcultures, and Youtube

 “Thus, as soon as the original innovations which signify ‘subculture’ are translated into commodities and made generally available, they become ‘frozen.” once removed from their private contexts by the small entrepreneurs and big fashion interests who produce them on a mass scale, they become codified, made comprehensible, rendered at one public property and profitable merchandise. (132)

This quote was the most impactful to me out of what Hebdige discusses. He writes that once a subculture is taken by the mainstream, it loses its uniqueness because the mainstream does not understand the original innovation that went into the subculture. The mainstream wants to take the style of the subculture and mass produce for the masses. Walter Benjamin writes about authenticity is key to the value of the original work. Thus, when a subculture becomes replicated for the mainstream, it loses its authenticity and thus its true value. 

This quote reminds me of the current Youtube sphere and the mainstream style that has developed because of it. When Youtube started out, it became a subculture of creators who used a specific style of editing and method of speaking in order to talk about/ review/ vlog or anything else they wanted to do. However, as Youtube has become more mainstream, media outside of media has started to replicate the style of Youtube. The use of a “jump cut” has become more used in cinema and has become mainstream. I argue that the appearance of Youtube helped to raise the amount of “Found footage” style films that have come out in the past couple of years. However, due to this translation of the subculture innovations, whenever the mainstream uses Youtube style editing or manner of speech, it comes off as fake and detracts from the value of the creators on the platform.

Evie 11/3

 “What distinguishes the telephone from the other great media is its decentralized quality and its universal exchangeability of the positions of sender and receiver” (535)

I found our discussion on Mark Poster yesterday very fascinating. Before I unpack this quote, I would like to rewind back to the idea of rhysomic spectatorship. With rhizome meaning spreading and spectatorship meaning watching, this idea highlights the expansion of a kind of inactive observation. As we mentioned in class, cinema has trained us to be spectators. Directors and producers create perfect films that have been cut and edited for us so that our only job is to sit back and passively watch. As spectators, we are constantly being fed media and we have no active role in the production or how it's getting sent to us. 

Poster references that Walter Benjamin envisioned the democratic potential of the increased communication capacity of radio, film, and television. However, he goes to challenge Benjamin’s idea by arguing that the more radical communications potential was the telephone. This is because of its “decentralized quality and universal exchangeability.” In other words, we are no longer the spectator when it comes to the telephone. Rather than passively absorbing information, we are active contributors while communicating on the phone. Information is getting sent to us in real time and we have the ability to exchange ideas freely. Radio, film, and television enable us to be mere spectators. In those forms of media, there is only one line of communication; the message, constructed by the producers and directors, is sent to the audience and the audience’s role is to simply receive it. However, the telephone is a radical communication invention in that there are two lines of communication. Messages are not only being received, but they are commented on through responses. Therefore, the idea of rhysomic spectatorship is not present in the case of the telephone. Poster argues that the only technology that imitates the telephones structure is the Internet. Like the telephone, the Internet has multiple lines of communication that allows the audience to be far more than a spectator.

11/3 Pre-Class Blog Marx and the values of the Ruling Class

 For each new class which puts itself in the place of one ruling before it is compelled, merely in order to carry through it aims, to present its interests as the common interest of the members of society, that is, expressed in ideal form: it has to give its idea the form of universality, and present them as the only rational, universality valid ones (Marx, pg. 40)

This quote, extracted from the Marx reading from this class, was what captured my thoughts the most. I thought was extremely relevant to our modern times and could be applied to so many interesting situations. First off, I defined the ruling class as the financially elite, like celebrities, millionaires, etc. Marx is saying that as new ruling classes into power, they will push their interests and morality on the general public to make it feel like that is the proper way to live life. Though the values presented by the ruling class are not always right or correct in any way, many people still feel like those values become the “universal” ones. 

I think an example that can be applied to this quote very easily. The current political landscape within celebrity culture in the United States. A lot of celebrities are very liberal and left-leaning in their beliefs. Thus, a lot of young people and the media culture is very left-leaning. Though I personally don’t disagree with their views, their views now are seen more like the “universal” or “rational” point of view. I’ve heard of cases of conservative or even centrist actors not get a role because of their political beliefs.  Within academia, I feel like if someone is more conservative in their point of view, they are seen as “irrational” and going against universal human rights because of their beliefs. While there are some people on the right who definitely think like, there is a stigma around not believing in left-leaning values wholeheartedly. This summation is based on my interaction with media, within academia, and within my own home life.

Post Class 10/29

 This reading from Mark Poster was one of most selections we have had in this course thus far. The reality is that we are approaching a new age of information technologies and resources to utilize. With the massive boost in population that will arise quicker than we know it, there will be brilliant minds creating technological phenomenons that will forever change the direction of all facets and disciplines of life. Poster offers a question, "will this technological change provide the stimulus for the installation of new media different enough from what we now have to warrant the periodizing judgment of a second electronic media age?" (Poster, 1995, p. 444). Poster imposes and collects information from an array of theorists trying to describe the direction of new media and how the democratic control presents, "more freedom, more enlightenment, more rationality" (Poster, 1995, p. 445). This feels pretty true especially with the internet being infinite with resources and different internal workings of the internet such as the deep and dark web. This falls in line with the concepts of apply modernity. "'Virtual reality' is a more dangerous term since it suggests that reality may be multiplied or take many forms" (Poster, 1995, p. 445). The words that truly stick out in this quote like 'dangerous' sound off an alarm in the brain because they are sensationalized words, but there is a lot of truth to these pieces of technology becoming a potential detriment to society. Time is something that gets taken from the virtual senses of a false reality. Video games being the most prevalent time waster can cause a variety of dangers to society. Mental and physical health are the most surface-level issues. The direction in which virtual reality could have infinite possibilities and outcomes. Could it be a possibility for technology and media to have severe regulations in a democratic society and free market? Is this the direction of the postmodern?

Jane Denson, 10/29

        Last class' discussion of the Disneyfication of reality in relation to Eco's theoretical analysis got me thinking about the overwhelming sense of artificiality that manifests within the theme park, as well as the ideological undertones that are maintained there. Having been to both Disneyland and Disney World, I can safely say that upon entering the park, it feels as though your senses are being bombarded and that you have immediately crossed into another dimension, a purely fictional one. What is interesting here is that right before this "magical" transportation, you have to endure a robotic process when passing through security, which makes me wonder if this foreshadows, in a way, the robotic essence that is build into the park itself (e.g. the lines to ride the attractions, the restricted movement from the crowds, etc.). From my personal experience, I have found Disney to be rather grueling, in addition to a heightened reality. From a consumer's perspective, the park is stripped of all the world's negative aspects (e.g. poverty, hunger, trauma, etc.) and instead presents itself as the perfect American fantasy, which feels strange after multiple visits. Not only that, but the environment appears to be absent of all labor and hardship. However, I'm sure if you were to ask any employee, they would express how taxing and physically demanding their unique positions are, which may point to the larger notion that it takes a great deal of work to create a utopian realm and thus our actual society is far from it.

        Everything, from the fake grass to the whimsically sleek buildings (which look as though they can be inhabited) to the overbearingly jubilant actors, cements Disney as a place that can only be fictional. When I was little, I always bought into this alternate type of reality and observed the park as "magical," but this was simply because it constantly had an aura surrounding it that represented perfection. Now, I genuinely can't stand walking through there for the apparent reason that it lacks depth. Over the years, I learned that true beauty, unlike the superficial splendor Disney prefers to showcase, emerges from pain and frustration. Therefore, as a present-day attendee, I can't help but dislike the theme park for its highly manufactured qualities, emulation of nature's spectacles (e.g. wildlife in Animal Kingdom), and the grandeur of a depiction that it paints of American culture. Sure it can still be fun and adventurous, but what does that mean when it fails to capture life for what it is?

Post Class 10/29

 

“Virtual reality is experienced as reality”

 

In his work, Zizek highlights that virtual reality is starting to evolve and reach the experience of true reality. I believe that his argument is true. This is especially true because of the advancements made in technology over the past decade. I believe that virtual reality began as early as the radio and television were invented. People were able to escape reality through devices and enter into new experiences through listening and watching. This has since evolved in the creation of the internet and the booming video game industry. Technology has allowed us to “experience” things we would never have gotten to. One of the first examples I see of virtual reality blending with reality is the Avatar Flight of Passage ride located in Disney’s Animal Kingdom. The ride is a 3D flying simulator allowing riders to experience flying around the landscape of Pandora, a fictional land. When I rode this ride for the first time, I actually felt transported to this magical place and felt as though I was actually there. It was an amazing experience and I really felt as if I was really flying around Pandora. Another recent example is Kanye West’s gift of a hologram of Kim Kardashian West’s late father. Using virtual reality, Kanye gave Kim an experience with her father even though he was not really there. Virtual reality continues to evolve, and I wonder if one day it will start to take over. Will people begin to be glued to their screens to try and experience these newly developed virtual realities? Will this new obsession with creating virtual reality take us away from being present with the world? Does it take us farther away from what is true? I think virtual reality is unique, but I do not want reality and virtual reality to blend too much. I like being present with people and living in the moment and do not want technology to take that away from me.

Does reality outstrip fiction? 10/29 Post Class Blog Post

 Baudrillard says “But does reality actually outstrip fiction?”

I find this quote to be super compelling because of mu personal relationship with fiction as an artist. 

As an actor, I have to dissect fiction every day. I have to understand the motivations, thoughts, history, relationships, and more of a person who does not exist in real life. The more I learn about a character, the more “real” they become to me. Even in abstract plays, the ability to find the “realness” or the humanity of a character is so important to make it compelling to the audience. . It reminds me of a quote from Oscar Wilde “I love acting so much. It is so much more real than life.” How is something that is fictional, like acting, more “real” than life?  Wilde is making a similar point, I feel, to Baudrillard, as that in reality, there is so much that is unsaid or unspoken. In fiction, however, people are more real in many ways because they are more raw and open. A good example of this is what people consider “method acting.” Method acting is when an actor acts as a character away from the set or away from the stage. They continue to live like the character in order to understand the character. There are actors, in legends, that is claimed to be lost to a character. For example, when the Batman sequel The Dark Knight was released, the film was hyped up because of Heath Ledger. Heath Ledger played the Joker in the film and stories of his method acting reached the ears of many. They claimed that he lost himself so much to the roel that committed suicide. Though I don’t know how accurate these fables are, it still speaks the truth about the balance between reality and fiction. For actors, fiction outstrips reality in many ways. In the case of Heath Ledger, his fiction outstripped his reality so much that he eventually killed himself because of it. Thus, as Baudrialled is saying, reality does NOT outstrip fiction.

Pictured Below: Heath Ledger as "The Joker"