The Thing is a very interesting movie to watch for its perspective on men and women. The movie has no women in the actual cast and in a way represents a society run by men (much like the real world). The movie starts off with the creature in a dog form running from men shooting at it. It shows no aggressiveness towards its new home until provoked. The other dogs attack it. The thing never even attacks the man who takes care of it (even though they are alone alot). The creature is passive, or reactionary. What is the significance of the thing representing a woman?
kristeva says, "Excrement and its equivalent stand for the danger to identity that comes ffrom without; ... Menstrual blood on the contrary, stands for the danger issuing from within the idenity. It threatens the relationship between the sexes within a social aggregate." The Thing threatens both identity on the outside and inside. It threatens death and life. It creates a false copy of a person. This abjection must be purged from the group or the group will fail. What is the significance of this abjection?
The Thing has many female traits, the only way to stop it is to use fire which symbolically represents male strength. The group of men are very close minded and do not even try to understand this creature and its need, but only exterminate it. The Thing only attacks when provoked or in order for its survival. (women represent procreation and thus survival of a society) What is the significance of this abjection being purged?
In my opinion, the effort the men take to purge themselves of this threat causes them to go craxy, not trust anyone, and to lose their grounded idea of identity. This (female) Thing has completely destroyed the men's unity as a group. It is funny because woman can often break up groups. It is also interesting that a passive figure caused all. The Thing did not arrive on camp and start attacking everyone, but the men started to feel threatened and reacted on those feelings. (and they say women do not think things out) What is the significance of the end to this movie?
In the end only two characters survive the camp blowing up. One of the characters may be the thing, but you never know. They will both either freeze to death (cold eventually overpowered the fire), or the thing will theoretically hibernate and survive the cold and live to move onto another society, reinforcing the idea that it is an abjection in society that still must be purged to save male identity.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
Ma Vie En Rose
"Ludovic Fabre has no story of his own to tell" says Schiavi regarding narrative forms. This is an interesting concept because after watching it, I felt like I had just watched a story. It to me felt like a family's story, not Ludo's. I am going to bring up an old White quote, "To narrate is to moralize." What is the significance of the story's "narrative"?
I believe that they story is presented in a less narrative arc way to avoid that moralization that white talks about. If the story's values were completely against Ludo then we all would feel awful, maybe not buy into it. However, if the values were 100% for Ludo's feelings then it would not discuss this issue in an open sense. What is the significance of the issue being so open?
The movie is hardly a easy movie with a nice ending filled with closure. Ludo's daydreams of escaping into Pam's world become more and more grandeur. Ever, his mother climbs into the billboard and is able to see her child's wish. I think this movie is made this way to accurately show the complexity of gender today. What is the significance of Ludo identifying with Pam?
Pam is such an extreme. She is blonde with big boobs, who marries Ben (I think) and lives in a dream world with bright colors and the sun shining. Gender is so learned, trained, and forced upon us all with such authenticity that it seems real. If Ludo is merely switching genders then is the significance of that?
Is it that Ludo does identify as a girl and has only Pam as a way to express and show that? Or, it is that him wanting to be like Pam is more ideal to himself. The difference in identification and idealization is small, but big at the same time. We all claim a gender, sexuality, and identity. But why? I used to climb trees because my bother told me girls couldn't do it. Does this make me a tomboy, rebel, or lesbian? This idea of gender and idenfication is in actuality so complex but the world shoves it into little boxes and says you either this or that. This movie helps broaden our thinking of what all that means... I will get off my soap box now haha...
I believe that they story is presented in a less narrative arc way to avoid that moralization that white talks about. If the story's values were completely against Ludo then we all would feel awful, maybe not buy into it. However, if the values were 100% for Ludo's feelings then it would not discuss this issue in an open sense. What is the significance of the issue being so open?
The movie is hardly a easy movie with a nice ending filled with closure. Ludo's daydreams of escaping into Pam's world become more and more grandeur. Ever, his mother climbs into the billboard and is able to see her child's wish. I think this movie is made this way to accurately show the complexity of gender today. What is the significance of Ludo identifying with Pam?
Pam is such an extreme. She is blonde with big boobs, who marries Ben (I think) and lives in a dream world with bright colors and the sun shining. Gender is so learned, trained, and forced upon us all with such authenticity that it seems real. If Ludo is merely switching genders then is the significance of that?
Is it that Ludo does identify as a girl and has only Pam as a way to express and show that? Or, it is that him wanting to be like Pam is more ideal to himself. The difference in identification and idealization is small, but big at the same time. We all claim a gender, sexuality, and identity. But why? I used to climb trees because my bother told me girls couldn't do it. Does this make me a tomboy, rebel, or lesbian? This idea of gender and idenfication is in actuality so complex but the world shoves it into little boxes and says you either this or that. This movie helps broaden our thinking of what all that means... I will get off my soap box now haha...
Monday, November 16, 2009
Far From Heaven
This movie, in my opinion challenges many things. When looking closely the movie examines race, sexuality, and the idea of "progress". Fanon states, "I move slowly in the world, accustomed now to seek no longer for upheaval. I progress by crawling. And already I am being dissected under white eyes, the only real eyes. I am fixed. ... I feel, I see in those white faces that it is not a new man who has come in, but a new kind of man, a new genus. Why, it's a Negro!" This helps us investigate the significance of race.
The movie obviously is set in the 50's and thus we are familar and easily appalled at the types of discrimination we see. Thinking to ourselves, "Thank God I live in advanced times." However, I strongly believe that Fanon nailed a key issue of the movie when he says, " I am Fixed." Yes the audience can say they live in better times but I would argue that race is still Fixed. Stereotypes work against everyone. The white world has accepted the black man, but not as a man, but a black man. The division is still there (HELLO OMAHA), just because the lines are blurry does not mean they aren't there. This idea of stereotypes transcends just race too. What is the significance of gender?
In the movie, the husband is a gay man. This is a taboo then, and a huge one. However, in today's times is it that much better? Like I said, it may be more accepted. But, take a gay man who does not act "gay" that is hard for people to understand. If a man is not effeminate but gay, it is still a big taboo. Same with a very pretty, feminine lesbian. They are not taken seriously or understood. The pride parade in Omaha is very underground for prejudice reasons. Now what is the significance of kathy?
"I am suggesting that we need to separate gender identification from sexuality, too often conflated in the name of sexual difference." Kathy is a hard person to peg. She possesses both female and male traits. She is also the one pursuing Raymond and it is HER gaze we see, with him being the spectacle. She does not become a man but is able to being a strong woman protagonist. Her desire for Raymond is much like the male gaze. This makes the movie take into question typical gender roles. The man should pursue the woman, yada yada. So, what is the significance of this all?
To me, the movie is a huge statement. It has been some 50 years later and have we really fixed these issues? In the movie it is tragic, she watches him leave on the train. The struggle is over, the characters are fixed. They cannot move. I think it is telling the audience to not let this happen.
The movie obviously is set in the 50's and thus we are familar and easily appalled at the types of discrimination we see. Thinking to ourselves, "Thank God I live in advanced times." However, I strongly believe that Fanon nailed a key issue of the movie when he says, " I am Fixed." Yes the audience can say they live in better times but I would argue that race is still Fixed. Stereotypes work against everyone. The white world has accepted the black man, but not as a man, but a black man. The division is still there (HELLO OMAHA), just because the lines are blurry does not mean they aren't there. This idea of stereotypes transcends just race too. What is the significance of gender?
In the movie, the husband is a gay man. This is a taboo then, and a huge one. However, in today's times is it that much better? Like I said, it may be more accepted. But, take a gay man who does not act "gay" that is hard for people to understand. If a man is not effeminate but gay, it is still a big taboo. Same with a very pretty, feminine lesbian. They are not taken seriously or understood. The pride parade in Omaha is very underground for prejudice reasons. Now what is the significance of kathy?
"I am suggesting that we need to separate gender identification from sexuality, too often conflated in the name of sexual difference." Kathy is a hard person to peg. She possesses both female and male traits. She is also the one pursuing Raymond and it is HER gaze we see, with him being the spectacle. She does not become a man but is able to being a strong woman protagonist. Her desire for Raymond is much like the male gaze. This makes the movie take into question typical gender roles. The man should pursue the woman, yada yada. So, what is the significance of this all?
To me, the movie is a huge statement. It has been some 50 years later and have we really fixed these issues? In the movie it is tragic, she watches him leave on the train. The struggle is over, the characters are fixed. They cannot move. I think it is telling the audience to not let this happen.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Dancer in the Dark
So, it won't let me post the picture, but if you go online and find the album cover for the soundtrack of Dancer in the you'll see a close up view of Selma and it is soo pixelated that it looks blurry or hard to clearly see. She is wearing her glasses and it is titled, "Selma's Songs." This made me ask the significance of vision?
Selma is blind in several senses. She physically can't see but is also oblivious to the world around her. For example, she is oblivious to the director keeping her there (for the police). The other characters, however, see just fine allowing us to SEE her clearly. So what is the significance of her not being able to see while everyone else can?
Marx states, "Therefore we have to grasp the essential connection between this whole estrangement and the money system." Through his essay we see that the worker feels alienated and estranged. The sense of false consciousness adds/helps create this false feeling of alone. We see the other characters see her struggles. We see them be kept at a distance. What is the significance of this distance?
The audience feels detached from Selma just like all the other characters. The movie is filmed making us feel not part of the story, but as a witness to the story. This alienation that she feels seeps into our understanding of her and how we relate to her. The call to arms is to us "witnesses." What is the significance of alienation?
This might be a stretch but Marx says, "the worker puts his life into the object; but now his life no longer belongs to him but to the object." It seems to me that the object in this movie is not her work (that is a cause of the alienation but not the product) but her son, Gene. She literally gives him all she has. She works and works and saves and saves and even lies for her son. Gene is her product or commodity.
Selma is blind in several senses. She physically can't see but is also oblivious to the world around her. For example, she is oblivious to the director keeping her there (for the police). The other characters, however, see just fine allowing us to SEE her clearly. So what is the significance of her not being able to see while everyone else can?
Marx states, "Therefore we have to grasp the essential connection between this whole estrangement and the money system." Through his essay we see that the worker feels alienated and estranged. The sense of false consciousness adds/helps create this false feeling of alone. We see the other characters see her struggles. We see them be kept at a distance. What is the significance of this distance?
The audience feels detached from Selma just like all the other characters. The movie is filmed making us feel not part of the story, but as a witness to the story. This alienation that she feels seeps into our understanding of her and how we relate to her. The call to arms is to us "witnesses." What is the significance of alienation?
This might be a stretch but Marx says, "the worker puts his life into the object; but now his life no longer belongs to him but to the object." It seems to me that the object in this movie is not her work (that is a cause of the alienation but not the product) but her son, Gene. She literally gives him all she has. She works and works and saves and saves and even lies for her son. Gene is her product or commodity.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Rear Window
"film on the other hand, extends our comprehension of the necessities which rule our lives; on the other hand, it manages to assure us of an immense and unexpected field of action." - Walter Benjamin. I directly linked this closing argument to Rear Window. What is the significance of Miss Torso's role in this film.
Miss Torso is a complicated character presented to us only through the peeping eyes of L.B. Jefferies. In the beginning she totally satisfies Freud's / Mulvey's interpretation of a woman's role in film. As Mulvey says, "The determining male gace projects its fantasy onto the female figure." L.B. Jefferies sees her as purely physical as she trounces about in her scandalous attire. What is the significance of her being presented as a sexual spectacle right off the bat?
"liberal use of subjective camera from the point of view of the male protagonist draw the spectators deeply into his position, making them share his uneasy gaze.-Mulvey. We are blatantly aware of the sexual spectacle that Miss Torso represents. Since, the audience is aware of this feeling it allows for us to agree with it, or disagree. What is the significance of being able to form an individual opinion on a sexual spectacle?
When we are aware of such a spectacle we can start to question the correctness of our assumptions. The entire movie the characters look in on Miss Torso and make assumptions about her. Just like in society pretty young women who put themselves on display immediately are judged and put into a certain category. However, in the picture above is the twist. Hitchcock shows her with her lover. A short, dorky, military man. Completely smashes all the assumptions about her. What is the significance of Miss Torso not being what we expect?
The fact that Miss Torso does not chose to love any of the wealthy (sleazy) men who come over for her party show her in not just a sexual light, but shows her as a woman of substance. She obviously loves for love (not money or looks which you would expect). I think that setting her up as the standard "woman spectacle" and then proving it wrong makes the viewer think twice about making assumptions in the real world. Just like you can't judge a book by a cover, you can't judge a woman on sex appeal alone.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Persepolis and Epileptic
I have never read a "graphic memoir" so to speak, and really enjoy the depths both of these works were able to traverse. In White's article he says, "that narrative discourse serves the purpose of moralizing judgments." I think these works would support his thesis. Persepolis argues for a different world view of Iran and Epileptic argues for an understanding of incomprehensible diseases; while at the same time coping with issues of identity, family, and suffering.
Epileptic and Persepolis both stick to black and white but the effect is different. What is the significance of the different effects created by black and white in these two works and how does it add to there storyline or mood?
Persepolis employs very cartoonish drawings and never employs fully realistic drawings. It also keeps to a simple black and white format with very little shadowing. It is a linear story and allows the reader to be drawn into that world completely. The black is not a looming threat or a depressing tone (pg. 52). It is simply performing its function as a background, color of clothing, etc. It allows the focus to be on the storyline and makes it that much more translatable to the masses.
Epileptic also uses cartoonish drawings but also uses some realistic drawings and that is a ton of shadowing throughout. In this book the darkness seem ominous, desolate, and insatiable. Page 42 uses just blackness to show the doctors and the reader immediately knows its bad. On page 113 it seems to be trying to swallow Jean-Christophe and on page 122 you can see how the shadow use can add a dark tone on a character.
So in Epileptic the darkness is there for a very specific reason. What is the significance of darkness being so ominous and looming?
The way I saw it, darkness was a symbol of sickness. And not just Jean-Christophe's sickness but also to the subsequent sicknesses of the family. His mother is haunted, his sister severely depressed, and David contains a rage (maybe from inability to express his feelings or save his brother). If seen in this way it can represent a visual balance of Characters vs. Darkness. It threatens to engulf every person and one must not succumb. Towards the end (pg 144) Jean-Christophe is shown as in all black. He is unable to fight of this Epilepsy and the visual rendering impacts the reader on a very symbolical and emotional level.
Epileptic and Persepolis both stick to black and white but the effect is different. What is the significance of the different effects created by black and white in these two works and how does it add to there storyline or mood?
Persepolis employs very cartoonish drawings and never employs fully realistic drawings. It also keeps to a simple black and white format with very little shadowing. It is a linear story and allows the reader to be drawn into that world completely. The black is not a looming threat or a depressing tone (pg. 52). It is simply performing its function as a background, color of clothing, etc. It allows the focus to be on the storyline and makes it that much more translatable to the masses.
Epileptic also uses cartoonish drawings but also uses some realistic drawings and that is a ton of shadowing throughout. In this book the darkness seem ominous, desolate, and insatiable. Page 42 uses just blackness to show the doctors and the reader immediately knows its bad. On page 113 it seems to be trying to swallow Jean-Christophe and on page 122 you can see how the shadow use can add a dark tone on a character.
So in Epileptic the darkness is there for a very specific reason. What is the significance of darkness being so ominous and looming?
The way I saw it, darkness was a symbol of sickness. And not just Jean-Christophe's sickness but also to the subsequent sicknesses of the family. His mother is haunted, his sister severely depressed, and David contains a rage (maybe from inability to express his feelings or save his brother). If seen in this way it can represent a visual balance of Characters vs. Darkness. It threatens to engulf every person and one must not succumb. Towards the end (pg 144) Jean-Christophe is shown as in all black. He is unable to fight of this Epilepsy and the visual rendering impacts the reader on a very symbolical and emotional level.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Blues and Reds
I have never read anything like "The Sandman." I loved the way it invoked realism and also incorporated fantasy and even symbolism. It is the type of book that after finishing it, I cannot seem to stop thinking about it. I wanted to know the significance of Dream's dark personality.
He is usually wearing something dark/blue and something ominous like a massive cloak or trench coat and is very often pessimistic seeming. I thought this could be a commentary on the nature of dreams themselves (that we often dream of things we are scared of) or if it was intended to turn our concept of death upside down (the fact that his character could easily be taken for Death, but is actually DREAM is interesting to me). This led me to ask what is the significance of the color blue and its relationship to Dream?
In almost every panel of Dream blue is accented or stands out. His hair, skin, cloak, and even his eyes. When we see things from his perspective everything is in blue.McCloud says, "Colors could express a dominant mood and whole scenes could be virtually about color." Page 34 you see Dream's face for the first time and his eyes, hair, and the bubble he is in is blue. Normally blue indicated calmness or serenity. To me, this effect of blue makes me think of Dream more as the ocean. It can be calm and beautiful yet it can also be powerful and dangerous.
I also wanted to find the significance of Dream and the red. Dream's cloak is the only thing that ever is seen as red. It seems to me that red signifies the supernatural. His cloak is always red when the hem of it is contains faces (maybe dreams?? pg. 89) and most of the time in hell or the dreamworld its red (pg 191). If red usually means anger and blue usually means calm then what is the significance of that?
Is the author trying to say that life is more calm then dreams or that dreams are filled with anger and the supernatural? Even Death's character is more happy and peppy than Dream. Maybe it is as simple as we are being warned of the power of dreams and being told to pay attention to them.
He is usually wearing something dark/blue and something ominous like a massive cloak or trench coat and is very often pessimistic seeming. I thought this could be a commentary on the nature of dreams themselves (that we often dream of things we are scared of) or if it was intended to turn our concept of death upside down (the fact that his character could easily be taken for Death, but is actually DREAM is interesting to me). This led me to ask what is the significance of the color blue and its relationship to Dream?
In almost every panel of Dream blue is accented or stands out. His hair, skin, cloak, and even his eyes. When we see things from his perspective everything is in blue.McCloud says, "Colors could express a dominant mood and whole scenes could be virtually about color." Page 34 you see Dream's face for the first time and his eyes, hair, and the bubble he is in is blue. Normally blue indicated calmness or serenity. To me, this effect of blue makes me think of Dream more as the ocean. It can be calm and beautiful yet it can also be powerful and dangerous.
I also wanted to find the significance of Dream and the red. Dream's cloak is the only thing that ever is seen as red. It seems to me that red signifies the supernatural. His cloak is always red when the hem of it is contains faces (maybe dreams?? pg. 89) and most of the time in hell or the dreamworld its red (pg 191). If red usually means anger and blue usually means calm then what is the significance of that?
Is the author trying to say that life is more calm then dreams or that dreams are filled with anger and the supernatural? Even Death's character is more happy and peppy than Dream. Maybe it is as simple as we are being warned of the power of dreams and being told to pay attention to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)