Fandom: Cult or Commaraderie

In the discussion of fandom we talked about the lengths people go to in expressing their affinity with a particular group or celebrity. There are an endless variety of fandoms including Twilight, Harry Potter, Glee, Nikki Minaj, and Lady Gaga to name a few. Fans will even continue talking about a person or t.v. show when they are no longer famous, such as the show Friends. There are whole websites, theme parks, clothing lines, accessories, and social media pages devoted to fandoms. What is interesting is that these franchises can become huge relatively easily because we live in a time when there are so many ways to exploit a popular commodity. Is it that we love these franchises so much or more that they are so easily accessible and cross over into so many spheres of our lives? I think that people like being apart of a fan base because it makes them feel like they are apart of something bigger than themselves. Teenagers especially like being crazed fans because it lets others know their interests in an easy way. What people ultimately get out of being crazy fans is subjective, but people still like supporting things they connect with long after  those things are past.

Bell Hooks

The Bell Hooks video was interesting because while she advocates anti racism, she seems herself to have a deep seated resentment of white males. It certainly is understandable given that she is an African American female who must have faced discrimination most of her life, but while acknowledging that it must also be acknowledged that her resentment isn't healthy. She does focus on women in the media like Madonna and seems to feel that they are hyper sexual, but still in control of their choices. It seems strange that a woman who can be so liberated on one hand seems so closed off on the other. Maybe my interpretation is off, but Hooks seemed to have a lot of conflicting views.

Come on Barbie Lets Go Party!

When reading about Barbie and how she has furthered the idea that being white is right it struck me that I used to play with Barbies all the time as a kid, and never thought anything of it. Even though I am half white and half Mexican, I was never given a Mexican Barbie to play with. Not because I didn't want one or could not have one, but because I was not so concerned with the race of my dolls. Certainly, I was drawn to the perfect Western features most of my Barbies had, but I didn't dislike the features of the Black or Mexican Barbies. When looking at the Jean Kilbourne video about women in advertisements it became clear to me that from a young age we as women are bred to see women portrayed a certain way in the media. We have Barbies as kids and grow up thinking that women are these perfect physical specimens who can do it all while looking sexy. We are inundated daily with ads that reinforce women as objects or as beings not as intelligent as men. I was surprised to learn that things have only gotten worse since the first version of Killing Us Softly. Now more than ever women are used as sexual objects in ads, and the focus is really never put on her mind. Even ads in which women wear more conservative clothes or glasses, she still has a sexy librarian look about her. Barbies are like ads for kids about what a woman should look like, the reason it is funny is because if a real woman had Barbies proportions she would fall over! What isn't funny is that this leads to unhealthy body image for girls, as well as setting a precedent for women as objects.

Stereotypes vs. Truth: What are the differences?

This week we read and talked about racism, stereotypes, and colorblindness in the media. At first we always think that in today's society there is little racism left, escpecially being in a culturally diverse atmosphere like UIC. I think what we forget is that racism and stereotypes are still very present if in a more subtle way in our media and in our society. Is there a grain of truth in any stereotype? Maybe, because where else would they come from if not from observation of a certain " type" of people. The problem is when we blanket a whole race or community as a stereotype because a few people who share characteristics with them display certain behaviors. The t.v. clip we watched showed how other races like to blow things out of proportion when they feel like they are being attacked by another race. There are three sides to every story: yours, mine, and the truth. While it can't be denied the black character was approached by the white characters at first, in the end the black characters told a false of account of what really happened too. The truth is hard to get at when we are looking through the lens of stereotypes because it hits us right where we live. I think that a lot of the time we like to act like race doesn't matter because we either don't want to say it does, or we truly think it doesn't because we never experienced any hatred from another race. In terms of the Treyvon Martin shooting it is obvious that it was nothing less than a crazed racist man just waiting to commit a hate crime. The fact that Geraldo Rivera took sides against his own race and another minority shows how powerful being the " wrong" race can be,and that some will go to any lengths to seem "white".

Stereotypes yaddah yaddah

Stereotypes are around for a reason because there is always a grain of truth in them. Television producers and the media have figured out that playing certain stereotypes against others will make a profit. The idea that certain races are better than others is nothing new, but in a time when diversity is supposed to be at it's highest, there is still racism running rampant. Sometimes we think the stereotypes are funny even if we are apart of the race that is being mocked, but is this ok? This goes back to Marxism in that the elite are telling the oth classes what is funny and who should be made fun of, without questioning it. Stereotypes may not always be meant in a negative way, but the mere fact that we categorize people based on race is a problem because it pigeonholes them. Can't an Asian person not like math or a Jewish person not be a doctor? Of course they can, but stereotypes make it difficult for people to break the mold and with the media reinforcing the stereotype, it just makes things worse. The Seinfeld episode where they use yaddah yaddah to describe when someone is talking aimlessly for a long time is supposed to be a jab at the Jewish heritage. Jews in the show are portrayed at neurotic and judgmental furthering the stereotypethwt Jews re hard to get along with or think they are smarter than others. What was just supposed to be comedy took on a double meaning that audiences are supposed to be unconscious of.

The Fairy Tale Demographic

The audience critique we touched on Tuesday and the reading about women audiences reminded me of how women are targeted by the media. Harlequin books, romantic comedies, pop songs, and the fairy tales woman are fed from childhood all contribute to forming an audience. When girls grow up they are expected to be in a demographic that is fed fairy tale romances and unrealistic romantic portrayals, and like it. The more women are fed these fluffy unrealistic media, then the entertainment industries will continue to make cash. Women may in fact not believe things they see in rom-coms, but the fact that they go to see the film and pay the money for the ticket is enough of a reason to keep producing these types of films.While we haven't gone in depth with these articles and the audience point of view, it is obvious that audiences are segmented for the purpose of making profit. This goes back to hegemony in terms of wanting women to think the same way and keep the oppression in our patriarchal society. Audiences may be critical of the media they are consuming, but unless they demand better standards then media will continue to deteriorate.

Globalizing the Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

The article dealing with The Simpsons we read this week brought up a lot of good points about the way American culture is becoming globalized. We are exporting our entertainment like other goods to make a profit. In the process, many shows will loose their humor and wit because the language gets lost in translation. This article made me think about the Girl With the Dragon Tatoo franchise which was originally from Sweden, but was also turned into an American film. While Americans are the ones importing entertainment this time, there is still the sense of needing to make certain versions of a story for certain cultures. The film was much more violent in Sweden and the character of Lisbeth was a little more freaky looking. While the American version has it's share of violence, it is very different from the Swedish film. The reason changes are made in film and television is so that one culture will not be offended by another cultures norms or humor. The question becomes why even try to make films and shows global? Of course it is done for the profit, but do the shows lose meaning and do they actually do damage to the shows image? I think that trying to fit shows like the Simpsons into certain cultures does not work because the humor is just not there. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is different because the story is still remaining true to itself, but the violence is what is changed. The question is if changing things that are done in one context to another is a good idea. Samantha Morales

The Hunger Games and Marxism

http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/29/showbiz/movies/hunger-games-craze/index.html

I found this article on CNN's website regarding the eagerly anticipated Hunger Games movie. This trilogy of books has become increasingly popular in past months, and the growing fan base is definitely deserved. The books are well written and thought provoking as well as being highly entertaining, but all that this article deals with is the excitement and expected popularity of the film. Already they are comparing the fan base of the films to Twilight and Harry Potter both of which have become highly commercialized. It is interesting to note that there is no in depth analysis of the books or film, just the popularity level is talked about. People are being told to like this movie based on how popular other franchises similar to it have become. Now, people are being told to like this film by the elite in society regardless of if they have read the books or even like this type of film. There is a false consciousness being perpetuated because people believe they are choosing to view this film or read the books, when in reality they are being told what to do by the elite. In the end, the elite and Hollywood are the ones winning in this situation by getting rich from the masses, and we follow along blindly like sheep.

Diamonds are whaaaaaat???

Kanye West's video for Diamonds are Forever was really confusing because the message was ridiculously ambiguous. People generally know that Kane West is full of himself and thinks he's the greatest thing since sliced bread, but what I didn't realize was how much he was willing to exploit others just to make more money. Blood diamonds and the miners who die everyday trying to get them are a really serious issue, but instead of shedding light on that Kanye chose to make a juxtaposition of the way the miners live and the way he lives. He didn't actually come out and say this is wrong, he was just comparing the lifestyles. Plus, Kanye does were alot of bling, and he just chose not to wear anything in this video because why? The care he is driving is outrageously expensive, as are his luxury setting in Paris. If he wanted to make any kind of point, maybe he could have been wearing the diamonds too, showing that he participates in exploiting the miners labor as well. Also why is the song called Diamond's are forever? Is it because the harm caused to the miners will stay with them forever, and diamonds are the strongest stone? The concrete aspect of diamonds comes into play, but what is the lasting impression we are supposed to get?  Certainly Kanye thinks he is sending some message here, but what it is seems beyond my grasp. This video does at least show that power and wealth are what is important in this world in order to survive. The main point of this week's readings was that power and hegemony are the forces behind our reality, both of which are social constructions. So what is this video if not a power trip??

Homogenized Mocha-chino land

On CNN's website there is an article talking about our societies fascination with year end lists. We take a look back at the end of the yeAr, and make lists to say who was the best in film, TV, and music. This last year Lady GaGa and Justin Beiber were major trends in the social sphere, while Charlie Sheen was the butt of jokes for his outlandish antics. This article seemed perfect for this class because it deals with what we were taking about in terms of hegemony. We are living and contributing to a society that enjoys things like "best" and " worst" lists, and the media want us to participate. As stated in the article, we are so inundated with media everyday that sometimes lists are needed just to process, and see what is out there. We are made to believe that our opinion counts, and that We have a lot of power over what is popular. While that may be true, it is only half of the problem. The media and society in general likes hegemony because it's safe and there is a standard of " normality". How can you sell things to the masses if you don't know what they like? In a nutshell, we are being told what to like, and we aren't doing anything to fight against that. Samantha Morales http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/23/showbiz/celebrity-news-gossip/obsessions-year-end-lists/index.html