Conform or be sentenced to life without bail...

Welcome back, 

My thoughts from this week's readings have to do with consumerism and the grand scheme to get us to conform to "the norm". 

Why are we judged by what we wear, what we drive, and where we live? How much of our identity is entwined within the products we buy? Perhaps, we have been strategically spoon fed by advertising companies that we have become unaware that we have digested a whole cake.

This is becoming even more clear to me after moving to LA. As I started to assimilate into the community of West Hollywood while walking to Trader Joe's or the gym, I had feelings of inadequacy.  Every time my husband encouraged me to go hang out at the local coffee shop my first thought was "I can't, I'm not apart of them", "I don't fit in.", or  "I don't measure up." Why did these thoughts persistently plague me?  Well, it was because I felt I didn't have the right clothing outfit to sip coffee at the local watering whole.  You may snark at this revelation. Thinking of me as shallow or small minded, but could it be that you too have these thoughts programmed within? I believe so.

Thinking about what you wear to the super market is a much deeper issue than we might want to admit. We learn how to interact by interacting, we learn what not to say when we receive a negative response from another, we also know what to wear by watching what others are wearing. We are constantly being taught a "Code".

In discussing "Code", Jean Baudrillard states "Within 'consumer society' the notion of status, as the criterion which defines social being, tends increasingly to simplify and to coincide with the notion of 'social standing'. Yet 'social standing' is also measured in relation to power, authority, and responsibility. But in fact: There is no real responsibility without a Rolex watch! Advertising refers explicitly to the object as a necessary criterion: You will be judged on... An elegant women is recognized by... etc. Undoubtedly objects have always constituted a system of reference (reperage)" and "Obviously this code is more or less determinant given the social and economic level; nevertheless the collective function of advertising is to convert us all to the code. Since it is sanctioned by the group the code is moral, and every infraction is more or less charged with guilt."

From Baudrillard's theory, I was reluctant to go to the coffee shop because I was feeling condemnation from a code I didn't intellectually know existed, but I felt it. Felt the judgmental eyes from a panel of jurors that had found me guilty for breaking a law I was unaware off.

Ethnography

Walking into Barney’s Beanery feels more like I’m visiting a friend’s house than going to a bar. I climb the three or four steps onto an old wood porch and walk into what could have once been a small house in the Twenties. A fun, loud, energetic crowd beckons me in. Glancing to the right I notice a line of bar stools full of men and women sipping ice-cold beers. Looking ahead and to the left there are people sitting in multi-color booths chatting away with friends or watching the football game on one of the huge flat screens broadcasting in HD. Small red glass lights are hanging from the low ceiling and in white letters reads “Coors Light”. Antique license plates, rock 'n roll memorabilia, and posters of bikini-clad women cover the walls and ceiling. In the back corner of the room, I grab a table covered with cut out pictures of celebrities. If I walked to the back of the bar next the restrooms I could play Mrs. Pac Man and other games of a by-gone era.

The crowd feels comfortable in their surroundings, slightly intoxicated, and ready to flirt. Most of the guests are white, upper middle class in their 30s to mid 40s. The men seem dressed ready to relax and drink a few beers in their jerseys and shorts. The women on the other hand are dressed to impress in stereotypical “pick me up” outfits, perfect make-up, stylish heels, and without a hair misplaced. Smiles, laughter, and a bit of perfume drift out the windows into a pleasant Sunday evening..

I first notice an older hippie / 1980s rocker character standing near the pool tables chatting with anyone who pretends to listen. One blonde women in tight jeans and high heels -- 20 years his junior -- walks up with a pool stick and they start playing a game. It doesn’t seem to last long and she returns to her table and sits between two sophisticated looking gentlemen.

Right after she rejoined her clique, another group gets up to play pool. This crew is comprised of the same hippie dude, two slick young men, and a Latino blonde woman gather around the pool table to discuss who will be on whose team. The alpha male and the hippie start to argue about who gets to have the female on their team. I overhear the young man say “Look man, we all wanna to get laid tonight!” He ends up getting the girl in a tube top and mini skirt on his team. The smiles and touches are hard to miss throughout the game and up till the girl's victory.

While this was all unfolding, the table next to me is talking about the hot male television star of "Dancing With The Stars" which just walked in.  The men are putting him down while the women ooze compliments about his hair and muscles.

The last romance I witnessed was an older couple.  I hadn't previously spotted them, but noticed them when they stood up to leave holding hands. They were both well groomed probably close to being seventy, drunk, and intoxicated with beer and one another.

What do these observed interactions mean for our quest to define radical love?  Potential radical lovers have been tricked.

They all dressed, acted, and talked with the same fluidity I would expect if watching “How To Lose a Guy In Ten Days” or “Hitched”. It almost made me sad to realize my society has fallen in love with an image offered by media hypnotists.  We have been spooned fed a formula on how we should act in order to get “Love”. McDonald suggests “While most romantic comedies do not want to hint that the whole edifice of true romance might be as mythical as Santa, we as audience members, consumers, and film scholars need to remember that big business relies on our urge to make ourselves loveable through the consumptions of goods (make-up, shoes, underwear, grooming products, mood music, seductive dinners, and films). Hollywood is just one of this big businesses, and if we can accept that product placement in a film operates to sell more Coca-Cola and Nike products, why not also view the fantasy of romantic love as a product being no more subtly endorsed?” (p.15)

So, if the radical love that Hollywood movies are trying to push is just to sell products and help continue capitalism, then what is “radical romance”?

I recently read an article in “Yoga Journal” about a young engaged couple who in lieu of registering at the mall for gifts they encouraged their guests to give to a nonprofit school in Sarnath, India.  They raised five-thousand dollars and traveled there to serve the children on their honeymoon at this school that educates children who were once called the untouchable caste.  That's an radical romance.  To live our lives thinking about other people as more important than objects we desire.

                                              
                                                  Work Cited

McDonald, Tamar Jeffers. 2007. Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Genre. London
and New York: Wallflower.

CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF

Welcome,

I recently read Williams' "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" and watched Brook's film adaptation starring Elizabeth Taylor and Paul Newman.  This is a great play and a great motion picture. The play has many cracks that we could peer into about love, gender roles, and culture, but I would like to take a peek into gender roles.

The character that pulled my attention and left me wondering what Williams was saying about gender roles was Brick. He was by far the saddest cat stuck on the roof. He may have been the quietest,but he suffered the most. In his apathetic answers and his refills of whiskey, he gives us a unique peek into the burden of masculinity. He is asked( p. 108) why he drinks and his answer is "mendacity", referring to lying and liars.

What if one of the things he's tired of lying about is not his sexual preference, but his masculinity? There are a lot of pressures put on men. A lot of roles that are not always spoken of, but are expected. Societal groups do not let men off easily in this city or in the South.  Men are responsible for taking care of their families, expected to get the next big promotion, "make a name for themselves",  they cannot show fear,  be good at sports, and fight for our country in war.  This was all before the feminist movement.

Now, men also need to be supportive of their wives, good listeners, understanding, compassionate, know how to cook & clean, change diapers, and be sensitive. It's no wonder our boys have trouble becoming "men". The pressure they must endure is exhaustive.

In this book, Brick was expected to be the best. He was the best looking and a football hero until he got sick and lost his best friend. This is one of the norms he's tired of: the mendacity of southern societal assumptions. He's tired of living up to this impossible person. So, he drinks until he hears "the click"; the click that helps him not think of all the things he cannot be.

 In Barker's "Cultural Studies: Theory & Practice" (our other text) he points out that, "Giddens argues that addictions -- as compulsive behavior -- are narcotic-like 'time-outs' that blunt the pain and anxiety of other needs or longings that cannot be directly controlled. Addiction is the 'other side' of the choice and responsibility that go with the autonomous development of a self-narrative (or identity). In circumstances in which traditional guidance (for example about what it is to be a man) has collapsed, these lifestyle decisions become a potentiality 'dread-full process of making oneself'". I wonder if Tennessee was grappling with some of these thoughts when he wrote Brick's character.

I leave you to think about the men in your lives. Your friends, boyfriends, husbands, dads, uncles, and cousins. What societal norms are we pressuring them into? What mendacity do they have to live with?





.

Free agency.

Welcome back,

I got ahead of myself in my last blog. I forgot to introduce myself and give you insight as to why I am here writing every week.

My name is April, I am in an English class taught at CSUN, and it is part of our curriculum to explore  our readings, class discussions, and different media sources presented in class, on a blog. As it pertains to popular culture. If you stumble upon any of my writings feel free to leave  any helpful comments or questions.Since, most of the things I will be exploring are new ideas, I would love to hear your thoughts.


Today we our thinking through the 'concept of agency'.Here's the list that Chris Barker gives us from his book 'Culture studies': "The concept of agency has commonly been associated with notions of:"
-Freedom;
-free will;
-action;
-creativity;
-originality;
-the very possibility of change through the actions of free agents;


  I'm going to focus this blog on creativity and originality because I think that's what my generation is most plagued by. We all want to control our own image to show others we are original and special. We do this by spending our time on sites like facebook, myspace, and twitter. These popular websites give us the power to control how others view us,  with the pictures we post of us in Hawaii; perfectly tan and happy , and the comments we post. It has given my culture/ generation the illusion that we can create a unique self without the help of an outside Source.  But,can we? Do we have the power to step outside of our culture, our up-bringing,  and language to create ourselves?  I don't think we can.Most of the ideas we post on FB come from an outside source like our parents, friends, or teachers. Whatever cool thing we did this weekend already existed before we put it up on our page. Think about that. Any idea you have comes from somewhere else. 

Here are a few things that would have to happen, for me to be a free agency: 

-Never communicate;

-No media;

-No outside idea/ ideologies;

-No parenting;

-No friends;

-Be God; 

-Create myself;

Try it if you want. What ideas, thoughts, actions have you had/done today that are shaped by language, history, or others around you? I tried to come up with one original thought that came from scratch. 


I couldn't. Most of my thoughts about reality our shaped by my faith and up bringing. Mostly, my identity is shaped by Jesus's teachings.


However, I do think that each of us are unique because no two people have lived the same life.   Our readings this last week explain it perfectly (p.236 ) " That is, while we are subject to the 'impress of history', the particular form that we take , the specific arrangements of discursive elements, is unique to each individual. We have all had unique patterns of family relations, of friends, of work and of access to discursive resources." 


On that note I leave you to ponder these thoughts. I myself will continue to analyze this particular concept for years.