#mcst 2030

[nilyaj-blog]

From your number 1 Fan

100 word analysis of Obama’s farewell address, using the language of structuralism to examine his rhetoric (or any theoretical lens learned in class). What did you connect with and what does he say about agency? How can you use theory and criticism as a way to critically “read” and analyze his rhetoric?

Barack Hussein Obama a man I envied as he took office, from a young age I wanted to be the first black president. Realizing early on there wasn’t people like me in positions like that. If I’m honest with myself I think Obama did a better job than what I could have accomplished. A the spry age of 11 I had never seen a man spark so much hope and ambition within the hearts of the public and it would take 7 years for me to see it again.

 In the next decade with the Obama presidency is added to history books and student begin writing papers on the mark he had left on American public during his time in office will we truly know his true impact. As outspoken as he was being the first president of the digital age he handled things very gracefully and with a genuine approach. I have stood by and been at odds with him as I have grown as a person but I will always hold a spot for him in my heart.

 From listening to his first white house press conference to now hear him bid us adieu. It is fascinating how he doesn’t feel as though he’s lost hope. Obama currently sits on the losing side he lacks a sense of bitterness in his heavy heart. As I had spoken on in my last post there are limits to what we can express through language that being said I believe in his farewell address Obama seeks to express the freedom we have within our actions in impacting the system. His has no point that he makes an enemy of the other side speaking on our democratic system as a collaborative process by which differing groups can fine common group and move towards a common good.

 The structural approach to his rhetoric best embodies Strauss’ approach to the subject matter looking at the coming together of opposing groups working together in the democratic system through hopeful optimism and action we can bring about positive change and move towards making this country great.

~Farewell Barack you will be missed

[nilyaj-blog]

Construction and Destruction

Race is a construct it is an idea that we have conditioned ourselves to believe is real. Meaning it can be deconstructed and that’s what I intend to do. Through critical race theory I will give my spin on how to end racism and when I say racism I mean from a systematic level.

Now before we proceed I must give a quick disclaimer, I am just one man I can only perceive racism through my lens. 

The first thing I believe we need to understand is the importance of racism is to create a divide between similar groups of people as a way to preserve the hierarchy. What the hierarchy seeks to do is to disseminate the notion that a group is different them and that those differences are inherently bad.  The hierarchy then favors those that subscribe to its ideals and perpetuate its message. This further discourages change because it makes one side feel rewarded making them complacent and uses that side to oppress the other restricting them from bringing forth change. What I propose is the first move to end racism is creating a common dialogue between races especially in situation that two distinct parties have very conflicting ideologies about one another. You cannot just cast away the distinction that race and racism doesn’t exist because it has effected many people and is ingrained within them.

This creates a binary opposition and the only way to destroy the opposition is refuse to make them your enemy. What is often the cause for someone who may not have beliefs that may not be well informed about how to interact act with certain groups given their lack of exposure to that group. Where this theory may be more in the vain of Derrida but I believe it still applies here. In creating a divide, the is a lack of communication this I where misunderstanding come from both sides. Further driving a wedge between cause us to internalize the ideas that stem from being separated. The reason we remember Dr. King so fondly is because to cracked the code of racism if you bring people together in the construction of a common goal rather than against a common threat you can have no enemy.

Second I believe we have to deconstruct racial identities. The reason for this is that it only perpetuates the idea of defining one's by the race and thus defining what it means to be of a particular way. In the book the author refers to the notion of referring to someone by their constructed racial identity such as the referring to his example of say "My wife if Asian" and what her being Asian might be how people might view her. By labeling some by their race there is a distinct connotation of who they are rather than just their appearance. This give arbitrary meaning the appearance of a person and categorizes.

Racism is built in the creation of categories that separate us and even as we move forward further integrating we have begun to create new divides. Take for example the construction of cultural appropriation, to say someone can appropriate another culture is to say someone can't be of a culture because of who they are. Even someone within a race can disrespect and that is often what actions that are labeled cultural appropriation are. Racism is not that of rocket science it is marketing like getting someone to buy into a product we've been fed messages of the existence of race and how its existence labels each group getting us to accept racism as fact and buy into it.

The hierarchy wants the lower part of the class structure to be racist to one another so we can't come together and regulate it. No were to too busy labeling each other and fighting in the streets calling each other names like children they've begun to pacify us. Racism is in and of itself a form of cultural structuralism and until  we are mental strong enough to allow black shirt in front of red hats in a peaceful manner racism will continue its pacification over us. 

Do you believe we are past Racism in our society? If not do you believe we can ever end racism?

Do you have a past experience where you believe someone has been racist towards you?

How do you feel about cultural appropriation?

[nilyaj-blog]

Feminist Masculinity: Liberation Pt.2

“It was difficult to face the reality that the problem did not just lie with men. Facingthat reality required more complex theorizing; it required acknowledging the role women play in maintaining and perpetuating sexism.”-Bell Hooks Feminism is for Everybody

I believe that Bells Hooks best illustrates her idea that feminism is for everyone when she speaks on feminist masculinity. Through this chapter she fleshes out the idea that the societal problems feminism hopes to overcome are not individually a male problem. The perpetuation of ideals such as sexism and male domination are not only performed by men but by women as well. Even if all the women in the world came together under the flag of feminism it wouldn’t solve the problem. The patriarchal institution breeds and grooms more men and women that internalize their ideals. This is where I believe we fine men hating feminist who are often made out to be the group of the whole by the media rather than outliers. I believe their ideology stems from the same place as the patriarchy just on the other side of the spectrum. For women to be free from man she must adopt the characteristics of man, but this only leads to female domination which is not the answer. This is not to cast aside powerful women feminist but there is also value in women that embody the characteristics that are divine within feminine. Feminism is not built on hate, feminism is built on a foundation beaconing for equality among all groups and classes. Asian, Black, Hispanic, Native, and White men and women living together in harmony along both sides to act as they so choose and accept them for who they are. Where the media hopes to tear us apart and turn us against each other feminism allows us a banner to stand together under for everyone in liberty and justice for all.

[nilyaj-blog]

YOU GET LIBERATION!

“Free at last. Free at last. Thank God almighty we are free at last”

Feminism has a similar essence to that of religion or just the idea of God. Let me explain, feminism is a very personal idea that can mean many different things to different. Rather than it being something one believes in or doesn’t feminism shall exist without your belief in it but its meaning is derived from what you believe it to be Feminism is an ideology of liberation unlike many ideologies it does not set itself upon limitations. Feminism invites many conflicting ideals to converge and coexist. For example, such is the thinking that being anti-abortion makes you not a feminist.

  Feminism is not based on a particular set of ideals but on the ability for one to choose the ideals they believe in while respecting the ideals of other. Feminism is pro-abortion it’s just not anti to the idea of choice. When applied to men it can even workout to how do you choose to portray masculinity. Where masculinity in the traditional mean is limiting to the ways in which men can act and express thoughts and feeling. Masculinity like many aspects of modern day society constructs a binary for people to follow, feminism chooses to deconstruct that binary through critical thinking and questioning. Feminism introduces the freedom for men to act and behave however they so choose. In Hook’s own words “Feminism is everything for everybody” this key distinction is what makes the meaning of feminism so hard to pin down give that it is not limited to a single distinction.

We are still in the midst of a second wave of the civil rights movement.  Where we are reconciling the issues either not yet addressed or outright ignored by those before us as well we hope to maintain the ground we have already treaded and forged a path of equality on it.  There will continue to be unrest in the application of feminist theoretical so long as we lack full equality. Even after these theoretical lenses don’t just fade into obscurity or we risk returning to our past mistakes.  The shifts and changes How can “theory” be put into action? As Hooks mentions theory is in all we do it is put into action not just through activism and protest it is through day to day life these theories are put into practice and it is this questioning of the past patriarchal order that propels us forward as a society.  

[nilyaj-blog]

Postmodernism: The Death of Simple Truths

Postmodernism is the rebel’s approach to analysis it seeks to deconstruct the thoughts and ideas of the pass in hopes to creates new provocative thought. The postmodern has overtaken modern thinking and put it on its head. What was once high class has been replaced with the avant-garde. In simpler terms the bourgeois has become the boujee. This had lead for the reign of new forms of artistic expression in mainstream popular culture such as proliferation of former subcultures such as gaming and hip hop. Our new sensibility to analytical thinking has made it easier for new forms of creation to occur. We are more open to the idea of criticizing the ideas of the old rather than blindly accepting the familiar. This approach to academia is not a new one counter thoughts are as old as human language but postmodernism comes as the process of deconstructing the works of the past hit an epoch.

This approach to academia has only been pushed further into the minds of scholars in the digital age. Now scholars of different schools, ideologies and theories have a platform in which they can easily discuss fleshing out their thoughts and debate them among opposing ones testing the academic strength of one or another. This fact accompanied with the growing accessibility to new knowledge has refined some theories that continue to hold up past the modern age strengthening them through scrutiny while other arise or crumble. As we move forward in the postmodern and by some accounts the post-postmodern age results into two types of creation this being the replication or reimaging of old thoughts and ideas paralleled with the birth of new thoughts that dismiss the past and attempt to resemble some sort of distinct other.

To avoid my common thread of referencing popular music I’ll address films once again. On the side of past ideas being shaped and reformed you have films such as The Nice guys a film where director Shane Black doesn’t necessarily demolish the conventions on the buddy cop genre he does successful push it into a space it hasn’t yet been prior. Shane Black has allowed for people to look at buddy cop movies as the same style of nonsensical action movies they have often been portrayed. Through making fun of the canonized beats and conventions of genre as great. In contrast you have films such as Nicolas Winding Refn’s Neon Demon, as film that pushes the bounds of storytelling in the cinematic landscape and deconstructs the medium. Neon Demon lacks a sense of conveniently in its cinematography and that is it greatest strength. These are both film that scholars of the medium can dissect and pull from and soon if they continue to hold up to the test of time these approaches shall be refined and diverted from to create new pieces.

[nilyaj-blog]

Blog Post #4:

Why do Wes Anderson’s movies all look and feel the same? Because he always works with Robert Yeoman.In film the visual aspects aren’t just commands ordered by the director, they are a conversation between the director of photography or DP aka the cinematographer. The camera is not a robot, its a tool used by a human being whether that tool be on a tripod, dolly, shoulder rig, etc. Every push, swish, pan, and tilt is controlled by someone. 

The importance to the fact of being knowledgeable of your cinematographer is when going further into Mulvey’s concept of the Male gaze within the medium of film rather than just seeing the director as a force that controls every shot, cut and angle. Now in certain instances this may be true with certain very stylized director like that of David Fincher who is very uncompromising on how his scenes are shot willing to shoot 100’s of takes of a scene to get it just right. But other director has more of a conversational approach with their DPs allowing them to move the camera to fit the look and film they hope to present within the frame. The distinct change that the Male gaze plays into this is taking into account who the director is and how they might frame the characters in the scene. As the film industry become less of a boy’s club with the introduction of female directors there has become more diversity in the angles.

Take for example Creed a spinoff of the Rocky movies of the late 70′s and early 80′s a very masculine film about the topic of boxing but what makes this film different from its predecessors is the change in cast and crew. Where they film may be written and directed by men the visual reins are held by a woman. Maryse Alberti a long time DP who's been around since the late 80′s. But major cinematic debut wouldn’t come until the 1998 film Happiness going on to head the visuals for films like 2008′s Wrestler. No even though she’s not the recognized and stylized of director her approach to filmmaking differs from her male counterparts given her gender. Since as a female she doesn’t necessarily possess a male gaze realistically. Though theoretically it still may have been ingrained in her as a result of her learning from primarily male DPs. In  testing my theory I’ve been comparing the angle that focus primarily on a female from the perspective of a male DP versus a female one. I’ve seen one common trend within films concerning the angles in which characters are shot.

My main focus has been on the films Creed, Pulp Fiction and Grand Budapest Hotel and what I’ve found is that the male gaze is represented primarily in two types of shots wide shots and close ups. These two angles place the audience in the position of the camera in relation to the actor or actress. The importance is how they look at us or in some cases away from us. When males are being shot it is more often than not they will look the audience directly establishing their dominance over the space around them and as a result the scene itself. Males also receive a shallower depth of field in close ups where they have not been separated from their surrounding showing a sense of connection and control it.  This compared to actresses who often be looking up at or away from the camera showing a sense of indifference or just allow the viewer to watch her in voyeuristic way without being noticed and in the instances that they are looking directly at the camera they are shot in a shallow depth of field separating them from their surrounding allowing us awe at their beauty. Another interesting angle that prefers one gender over another is a tracking shot by which the actor or actress leads the camera around this is almost always used for men and rarely for women.

For more on this concept here is an interesting analysis of a scene from Silence of the Lambs where a male and female lead have and interaction and you can see how this plays out in this dichotomy plays out in the scene and is emphasized by the cinematography:

[nilyaj-blog]

Blog Post #3:

The creation of civilization has brought forth a culture that chooses to distance itself from its natural wants and desires. The Repression of fulfillment an analysis of human desire. Humans, as species that is knowledgeable of its existence and limits that bound that existence we have built up these cultural concepts of fulfillment through consumption as we produce more and more faster and faster we must consume those goods at a similar pace. Through the past almost century since the commercialization of the 1920’s we’ve become more transfixed on material things whether it be clothes, jewelry or drugs. A contemporary example by which we focus on modern day commercialization and the over consumption that comes as a result is within the genre of rap music. One album has called into question these concepts to a higher degree than its contemporaries, though it may be overlooked this year by many rap fans is Kendrick Lamar’s Untitled Unmastered.

An album on which Kendrick calls into question our obsession with fulfilling ourselves within material things. He tackles this from multiple cultural perspectives in the song Untitled 03. In which the protagonist of the song is asked what different men of varying cultures have told him that he should pursue. In Freudian terms this has led to an inflation of the Ego as we try to separate ourselves from our basic human instincts in an attempt to transcend as a species. Lamar does not focus on subscribing to many of the ideals that he brings up casting many aside in a later song titled Untitled 07. Saying that pursuits such as drugs, love or fame will not cause one to transcend, whether that be to that of a higher plane or just in personal fulfillment it up to the listener. From Lamar’s perspective as with further pursue the desire of our desire become more focus on ourselves disconnecting ourselves from the rest of society may ultimately lead to our own detriment. A concept he presence a level of disgust with in the song Untitled 02.  

Many people that may agree with Lamar on a philosophical perspective may take a different path. There is a concept among that is very prominent withing user of LSD called ego death by which one while under the influence of LSD tries to cause for the psychological deterioration of their Ego. A group of artist that have tackled this concept is that of Flatbush Zombies. An East cost rap outfit whose grimy hard hitting rap music is reminiscent of their hardcore rock predecessors. As they tackle topics such as drug use and politics. 

For more on Ego Death:

[bchopp72-blog]

Feminism and Classical Hollywood Disney

In my final term paper I analyzed three Hollywood Disney Films and how they construct and created the gender binaries of females versus males. I used three in class theoretical lenses in which to frame my paper around the ruling class and how the media industry is a male dominated culture through a male set of eyes. Because of this women are displayed as objects and useful tools rather than as people. Classic Hollywood cinema also creates stereotypes and boxes of women that society feel they need to fit into. Films do this by showing girls within certain age of 16-24 and they have small waist lines, perfect hair, always have make-up on and let’s face it they are almost always white. Disney and Hollywood present that in order for females to be accepted by men they must either be like men or be for men. Independence is not an option and if a female wants to be independent then she still will look and appeal to male gaze of sex.