For this final analysis I want to analyze the movie Avatar. I am going to analyze this movie using some of the Marxist authors that we have studied throughout this summer session. The two predominate authors that I am going to focus on are Karl Marx and Louise Althusser; additionally however, a connection will also be made to Hegel in regards to Phenomenology. I seek to argue, from a Marxist viewpoint, the dangers and grave repercussions to invading a rural society for selfish monetary gain.
In the movie Avatar, the main character, Jake Sully, is a pawn in a game much larger than himself. This character, and the relationship that he has with his duty and his commanding officer, exemplifies the master/slave relationship that Hegel promotes. Hegel writes, “The lord relates himself mediately to the bondsman through a being [a thing] that is independent, for it is just this which holds the bondsman in bondage; it is his chain from which he could not break free in the struggle, thus proving himself to be dependent, to possess his independence in thinghood. But the lord is the power over this thing” (544). This quote exemplifies the relationship that Jake Sully has to his commanding officer; he desires his legs and he is promised them if he completes the mission and reports to Quaritch the Marine general. Jake is caught between two worlds; the world that he knows and the world of the unknown; Pandora. While initially Jake accepts the mission since he is promised his legs in return; as Jake progresses in fulfilling his role essentially as a spy he begins to love the indigenous people. He comes to find that he can relate better to them and understands their ways better than his own; in essence the truth begins to be revealed to him. Hegel explains truth, “The truth of the independent consciousness is accordingly the servile consciousness of the bondsman. This, it is true, appears at first outside of itself and not as the truth of self-consciousness. But just as lordship showed that its essential nature is the reverse of what it wants to be, so too servitude in its consummation will really turn into the opposite of what it immediately is; as a consciousness forced back into itself, it will withdraw into itself and be transformed into a truly independent conscious” (545). Jake reaches his full potential when he realizes that what his race is doing is wrong and fights with the indigenous against his race rather than for his race in the wrong. His race also acts as a master to which he is a slave to until he decides to break free and come into his own, to find his true identity.
A similar comparison can be made to this master/slave relationship and that is the correlation between the worker and the capitalist. Karl Marx displays a parallel relationship between the Proletarians [laborers] and the Bourgeois [Capitalists]. In this movie Jake Sully is the laborer or the Proletarian. He is owned by the Capitalist, he has no say in what goes on in the operation he is merely a pawn and is required to do what he is told. However this is not the only example of capitalism. The head scientist, Grace Augustine, that Jake Sully is working for is a laborer herself. She is in charge of creating a diplomatic solution or peaceful relocation of the Pandora natives. Nevertheless she answers to Parker, the leader of the entire Pandora operation and he is there for one reason; unobtanium. Marx explains an evolving capitalist society in his work The Communist Manifesto. He explains, “The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones” (657). The phenomenon that Marx explains is quite apparent in the movie Avatar. As the tension and fight for power increases amongst the characters in the movie the unifying element that brings each of the classes together begins to crumble. At the climax of the movie Jake Sully affiliates himself stronger with the natives than he does with his own race. This change in him creates a glitch in the entire operation. As he grows closer to the tribe he distances himself from his race more and more. The Marine general, Quaritch assumes the greatest power when he overpowers the attempts at a diplomatic solution. He gains power over Parker and his plan to move the tribe by force becomes a reality.
As previously mentioned the entire driving force behind the operation in Pandora is unobtanium; a commodity. The opinion that Marx holds about Capitalists and their obsession with commodities is prevalent in this film. Marx writes, “The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexions everywhere” (659). This ideology is ever apparent in the film. The whole reason that the Americans are on Pandora is purely greed. They seek unobtanium and they are not leaving until they get it. As Parker exhibits in the third scene in the movie, unobtanium is worth more than any earthly substance. Their sole reason for being on Pandora, for assimilating with the natives is for this commodity. Parker additionally gives reference to the stockholders back on earth; he says that they hate bad press but what they hate more is money lost. These stockholders are essentially the bourgeoisie back on earth, and they are governing the proletarians on Pandora for strictly monetary purposes. Marx states in this quote that Capitalists will go anywhere in the world to obtain commodities and to expand the market; this movie exemplifies that the bourgeoisie will not stop at earth. These characters will travel to distant and dangerous planets to obtain the unobtainable; to find even greater riches then can be offered on earth. Although it is a fictional movie, this is an extremely important element. Marx focuses on earthly treasures; however, if other worlds could be discovered, if other societies do exist on distant planets does it seem that farfetched that capitalists from earth would try to invade their planet and steal something valuable? Absolutely not, that is the exact depiction of a Capitalist; ruled entirely by greed and monetary gain.
Marx elaborates on this relationship between the working class and the capitalist in his work Capital. He further explains, “The Fetishism of commodities has its origin, as the foregoing analysis has already shown, in the peculiar social character of the labour that produces them” (665). This essentially means that a commodity is worth more for the labour that it takes to create or obtain it. This facet is also apparent in the movie; the Omaticaya tribe’s village rests on the largest unobtanium deposit on Pandora. This creates an ever greater demand for it because it is even more difficult to obtain. One of the largest, if not the largest tree on Pandora is where the clan’s village is stationed, directly below is the deposit of unobtanium. The American invaders are trying to peaceful relocate the natives in order to mine and take the unobtanium. The movie takes place while the attempts at a peaceful relocation are losing steam. Therefore, the relationship between the scientists and marines are growing thin, and tensions are rising. This relationship is different than the master/slave relationship in that they are more or less on equal grounds. The marines are the guns and the brawn that will take control of the operation of the scientists and diplomats fail in their attempts to peaceful alleviate the situation.
To elaborate further on Marx, in chapter ten of his work Capital he elaborates on labour-power versus labour. Marx states, “Capital cares nothing for the length of life of labour-power. All that concerns it is simply and solely the maximum of labour-power that can be rendered fluent in a workingday. It attains this end by shortening the extent of the labourer’s life, as a greedy farmer snatches increased produce from the soil by robbing it of its fertility” (672). The Capitalist in the movie Avatar subject Jake Sully to this; they expect him to be able to convince the Omaticaya tribe to move their entire home with a limited amount of time. The irony of it all is that it is unlikely that they even think that it is possible for him to complete this mission, and for that reason they move ahead with plans without Jake completing his mission. The labour-power is based on the risk and power is necessary to obtain a commodity. Marx explains, “But the value of the labour-power includes the value of the commodities necessary for the reproduction of the worker, or for the keeping up of the working-class” (672). He further explains, “The slave-owner buys his labourer as he buys his horse” (672). Jake Sully is expendable to the Pandora operation. Quaritch explains in the second scene of the movie that not everyone will survive their tour on Pandora. Death is imminent and everyone that agrees to this condition is essentially putting his or her life on the line. Jake agrees, he is offering up his life for this mission. No although he becomes a more significant player in this Capitalist game he nevertheless is still expendable because he is still in the working-class. He is not a Capitalist, he does not have any say in how things are run he is a labourer. As Marx exemplifies all labourers are replaceable no one labourer is better than any other, they are all equal and they are all insignificant.
As the movie progresses Althusser’s argument, posed in Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses, becomes more relevant. Althusser exemplifies that one can seek to understand ideology by accepting that he or she is merely a subject to ideology. He also gives heed to Marx’s definition of infrastructure and superstructure, both of which are apparent in this film. Althusser explains, “Marx conceived the structure of every society as constituted by ‘levels’ or ‘instances’ articulated by a specific determination: the infrastructure, or economic based (the ‘unity’ of the productive forces and the relations of production) and the superstructure, which itself contains two ‘levels’ or ‘instances’: the politico-legal (law and the State) and ideology (the different ideologies, religious, ethical, legal political, etc.)” (1338). This quote explains that society is broken down into two parts which can then be broken down into subdivisions within those divisions. The two larger parts are the infrastructure and the superstructure; however, what is even more important are the subdivisions within the superstructure which are the State and ideologies. This quote exemplifies the importance and relevance of ideologies. In the film the role of the State is played by the invaders, or the Americans. As Althusser explains, “the State is explicitly conceived as a repressive apparatus. The State is a ‘machine’ of repression, which enables the ruling classes to ensure their domination over the working-class” (1339). This domination is exhibited in the Americans structure. Furthermore Althusser explains, “Repressive suggests that the State Apparatus in question [the State] ‘functions by violence’ at least ultimately” (1341). The most important element of this quote is that a repressive state is predicated on violence; violence is the dominating factor in differentiating repressive from a non-repressive state.
As previously mentioned Jake Sully makes up the working-class; whereas the Quaritch makes up the Capitalist power; otherwise known as the State. Jake Sully as well as the natives to Pandora are all subjects to the State. The State has power over them which essentially means that the working-class is functioning in and Ideological State Apparatus that is the State. The working-class, the labourers are the subjects and they are functioning in the ideology that they are subjects to. This ideology is the State, and the power that the State has over the working-class. The minority group or the natives and those that fight for the natives’ freedom are the working-class. All of the scientists and the peace seeking characters in the movie are the working-class. They are the ones risking their lives the try to save the natives, or to try and make peace between the natives and the invaders. The invaders, the marines, the capitalists make up the State. Essentially they are in power, they are an ideological state apparatus in that they are a controlling factor in their search for the commodity unobtanium.
As the film illustrates there is an obviously important role that the State plays in this film; however, the role that ideology plays is less evident. As this quote explains the ideological implications can range from religion to political implications. I argue that the majority of the ideological implications are offered through the Omaticaya clan. They illustrate customs and beliefs; their love for nature and for all creatures is characteristic of their culture. Additionally, in terms of religion they believe in the power of Eywa. Eywa is their deity, their God to whom they pray to and seek solace from. Adverse to Christian belief Eywa is in a sacred tree and the tree is a place where one goes to pray.
In addition to these ideologies being characterized by the Na’vi people they also characterize Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) as well. Althusser explains, “I shall call Ideological State Apparatuses a certain number of realities which present themselves to the immediate observer in the form of distinct and specialized institutions” (1341). Althusser then puts a list together of examples of ISAs. Most of the examples that he gives can be exhibited in the film by the Omaticaya clan members. I have already touched on religion; education is another ISA that the Na’vi and even the working-class exemplify. When Jake Sully is being tested to see is he will be accepted as an Omaticaya he must learn. He is taught the ways of the Na’vi by one of the members of the clan. This is an important test in which all of the invaders will be judged based on his abilities. Additionally, the invaders attempt to teach the Na’vi people English and establish schools and institutions to learn their ways. Both of these are examples of education as an ISA. In both of these societies education is a fundamental aspect to fitting into the ideological depiction of that society.
Hegel, Marx, and Althusser’s opinions and thoughts are all prevalent in the movie Avatar. There are various other elements to each of their arguments that can still be exemplified. Nevertheless, it is clear that they correlate one with another, and that there are themes of each of these critical theorists and their prospective theories present in the film. This film has a deep dynamic that can find ties to any of the major critical theories that we have studied throughout this summer session. I have chosen to focus predominately on Marxism with correlations to Phenomenology as well.
Works Cited
Althusser, Louise. Ideologies and Ideological State Apparatuses. The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 1335-1361.
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. Phenomenology of Spirits. The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 541-547.
Marx, Karl. Capital. “Commodities.” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 663-671.
Marx, Karl. Capital. “The Working-Day.” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 671-674.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Analysis #6 [Final]
Analysis 5/6
For this final analysis I want to focus on feminism, predominately the author Susan Bordo and her work. I am going to examine the YouTube clip called the Dove campaign. This commercial exemplifies what goes into creating the advertisements that we see every day of perfect looking women; it aims to unveil the truth about marketing campaigns and how unrealistic the images that we are surrounded by everyday are.
I want to explain this video in terms of Susan Bordo’s work Unbearable Weight. In this work Bordo explains that the body essentially is a spectacle. She writes, “The body—what we eat, how we dress, the daily rituals through which we attend to the body—is a medium of culture” (2240). This quote explains exactly what this campaign is trying to point out. As we see from the dramatic transformation of this model into the image that is portrayed on the billboard. This young girl in the video undergoes a complete overhaul; she is not even herself at the end of it. Additionally, as we saw in the presentation yesterday on feminism from the slideshow that nearly everyone in the media spotlight has their body image distorted.
Bordo also says, “Through the exacting and normalizing disciplines of diet, makeup, and dress—central organizing principles of time and space in the day of many women—we are rendered less socially oriented and more centripetally focused on self-modification” (2241). IN this quote Bordo suggests a reason for which women adhere to these extreme diet and exercise regimens or resort to means such as bulimia and anorexia in order to lose weight. By being surrounded by images of perfectly skinny women daily women are desensitized to them, many young girls believe it is possible to look this way. When the reality of it is, that in order to be that skinny more often than not one must be photo shopped or altered in some way.
Like Bordo is exemplifying in this quote, this video clip is trying to show how unreal these ideal body images are. By showing everything that goes into making any advertisement it is creating a real life behind the scenes of an advertisement. Dove takes us behind the scenes to help us to uncover the truth. By grouping together the work of Bordo and also using this Dove campaign as visual proof we can see the effects the media has on body image. By creating more commercials and organizations such as this one we can hope for a society that is less centered on the female’s appearance. That a woman can be recognized for who she is not compared to the societal ideal exemplified in advertisements.
Works Cited
Bordo, Susan. Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body. “The Body and the Reproduction of Femininity.” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 2240-2254.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U
For this final analysis I want to focus on feminism, predominately the author Susan Bordo and her work. I am going to examine the YouTube clip called the Dove campaign. This commercial exemplifies what goes into creating the advertisements that we see every day of perfect looking women; it aims to unveil the truth about marketing campaigns and how unrealistic the images that we are surrounded by everyday are.
I want to explain this video in terms of Susan Bordo’s work Unbearable Weight. In this work Bordo explains that the body essentially is a spectacle. She writes, “The body—what we eat, how we dress, the daily rituals through which we attend to the body—is a medium of culture” (2240). This quote explains exactly what this campaign is trying to point out. As we see from the dramatic transformation of this model into the image that is portrayed on the billboard. This young girl in the video undergoes a complete overhaul; she is not even herself at the end of it. Additionally, as we saw in the presentation yesterday on feminism from the slideshow that nearly everyone in the media spotlight has their body image distorted.
Bordo also says, “Through the exacting and normalizing disciplines of diet, makeup, and dress—central organizing principles of time and space in the day of many women—we are rendered less socially oriented and more centripetally focused on self-modification” (2241). IN this quote Bordo suggests a reason for which women adhere to these extreme diet and exercise regimens or resort to means such as bulimia and anorexia in order to lose weight. By being surrounded by images of perfectly skinny women daily women are desensitized to them, many young girls believe it is possible to look this way. When the reality of it is, that in order to be that skinny more often than not one must be photo shopped or altered in some way.
Like Bordo is exemplifying in this quote, this video clip is trying to show how unreal these ideal body images are. By showing everything that goes into making any advertisement it is creating a real life behind the scenes of an advertisement. Dove takes us behind the scenes to help us to uncover the truth. By grouping together the work of Bordo and also using this Dove campaign as visual proof we can see the effects the media has on body image. By creating more commercials and organizations such as this one we can hope for a society that is less centered on the female’s appearance. That a woman can be recognized for who she is not compared to the societal ideal exemplified in advertisements.
Works Cited
Bordo, Susan. Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body. “The Body and the Reproduction of Femininity.” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 2240-2254.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Analysis #5
For this analysis I decided to take a closer look at the scene that we watched from “Westside Story” in terms of postmodernism. In this scene we see a group of young gang members confronted by a cop, officer Krupke. I want to look at this text specifically in terms of Foucault’s work “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison.” In this text Foucault explains the relationship between a panoptic prison system and how it relates to society.
The first relationship that I see in this movie clip is the interaction between Officer Krupke and the gang kids. He treats them as delinquents and the kids blame it on their parents. They are standing around in the streets because they don’t want to be at home. Foucault explains, in relationship to incarceration, that the delinquent’s home life should be investigated prior to his arrest. He writes, “‘On entering the colony, the child is subjected to a sort of interrogation as to his origins, the position of his family, the offence for which he was brought before the courts and all other offences that make up his short and often very sad existence” (1491). This quote exemplifies that it may not be entirely the child/culprits fault for his/her bad behavior; which is exactly what the gang members in the video are trying to point out.
The next scene is the song, where the guys try to point out the fact I have just suggested; that they are delinquents because of bad parenting. When the kid is bounced from place to place, from diagnosis to diagnosis, this shows that none of these diagnoses are correct. I think Foucault shows, in his work, an alternate form of punishment or diagnosis. As we see in the video clip, the end resolution after going through various diagnoses is to put him in jail after all; this was the first suggested form of punishment or reform. Foucault’s prison system essentially suggests that one watches over oneself or as he suggests the concept that “God sees you” (1491). This idea of a watch over oneself imprisonment, may or may not be effective but rather than putting someone through all sorts of hoops trying to diagnose him, it seems almost more practical to simply loop him in with all the other misfits or inmates with whatever issue they have.
I do not necessarily agree with this prison system, as it relates so greatly to leper colonies in that everyone, no matter what the sentence or disability they pertain, is all put into one place. I think that the watch over oneself style of running things could prove to be extremely disastrous; however, I think that this clip shows the amount of time and money that is wasted on diagnosing someone with a psychological or sociological disorder. Especially when in the end, he is diagnosed simply for being ‘bad.’
Works Cited
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism Second Edition. Ed. Vincent Leitch. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2010. 1490-1502.
The first relationship that I see in this movie clip is the interaction between Officer Krupke and the gang kids. He treats them as delinquents and the kids blame it on their parents. They are standing around in the streets because they don’t want to be at home. Foucault explains, in relationship to incarceration, that the delinquent’s home life should be investigated prior to his arrest. He writes, “‘On entering the colony, the child is subjected to a sort of interrogation as to his origins, the position of his family, the offence for which he was brought before the courts and all other offences that make up his short and often very sad existence” (1491). This quote exemplifies that it may not be entirely the child/culprits fault for his/her bad behavior; which is exactly what the gang members in the video are trying to point out.
The next scene is the song, where the guys try to point out the fact I have just suggested; that they are delinquents because of bad parenting. When the kid is bounced from place to place, from diagnosis to diagnosis, this shows that none of these diagnoses are correct. I think Foucault shows, in his work, an alternate form of punishment or diagnosis. As we see in the video clip, the end resolution after going through various diagnoses is to put him in jail after all; this was the first suggested form of punishment or reform. Foucault’s prison system essentially suggests that one watches over oneself or as he suggests the concept that “God sees you” (1491). This idea of a watch over oneself imprisonment, may or may not be effective but rather than putting someone through all sorts of hoops trying to diagnose him, it seems almost more practical to simply loop him in with all the other misfits or inmates with whatever issue they have.
I do not necessarily agree with this prison system, as it relates so greatly to leper colonies in that everyone, no matter what the sentence or disability they pertain, is all put into one place. I think that the watch over oneself style of running things could prove to be extremely disastrous; however, I think that this clip shows the amount of time and money that is wasted on diagnosing someone with a psychological or sociological disorder. Especially when in the end, he is diagnosed simply for being ‘bad.’
Works Cited
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism Second Edition. Ed. Vincent Leitch. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2010. 1490-1502.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Analysis #4
Analysis #4 Marxism
In deriving a connection from the clip we saw from the movie Glengarry GlenRoss there are various examples of Marxist views throughout this short scene. The first Marxist point that I want to emphasize is in relationship to Louise Althusser’s work “Ideologies and Ideological State Apparatuses.” Althusser explains, “As a first formulation I shall say: all ideology hails or interpellates concrete individuals as concrete subjects, by functioning of the category of the subject” (1356). In this quote Althusser basically explains that we are all subjects to ideologies and in this clip Alec Baldwin exemplifies that he is like an ideological state apparatus and the sellers are subjects. He does this by calling them by derogatory names, and referencing them predominantly by these names rather than by their real names.
Second, I want to focus on Marx himself and reference his work Capital “The Working-Day.” In which Marx emphasizes the difference between labor and labor power. He writes, “Capital cares nothing for the length of life of labour-power. All that concerns it is simply and solely for the length of labour-power, that it can be rendered fluent in a workingday” (672). This quote creates two examples in the movie. The first is that Alec Baldwin’s character symbolizes capitalism. He is the one in power, he comes into this office of sellers that are clearly below him, he is the capitalist and they are his workers. Second, is regarding the latter portion of this quote labor power. In this scene the sellers’ labor power is what they are paid for. They are expected to work at their full potential all of the time, their actual labor was not measuring up to their labor power and for that reason they receive this lecture for Alec Baldwin’s character.
The last aspect that I want to focus on is the way in which the people become commodities in this clip. The sellers become commodities in this scene when they are explained, by Baldwin, as being replaceable. Marx explains commodities in Capital “Commodities” and the differences in their use and exchange value. Baldwin exemplifies that the sellers are commodities by touching on both of these aspects to what creates a commodity. He explains that if the sellers are not doing their job to the best of their ability they are useless, and that if they are useless they will be exchanged for someone who will better meet the needs of Mitch & Murray.
There are various other examples in this short scene of Marxist’s beliefs and influences that can be pointed out. I have only suggested a few of these that I found the most interesting or that I related to best in the text.
Works Cited
Althusser, Louise. “Ideologies and Ideological State Apparatuses” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 1335-1361.
Marx, Karl. Capital. “Commodities.” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 663-671.
Marx, Karl. Capital. “The Working-Day.” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 671-674.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
#3
In this clip we see a silly example of the Oedipus complex that Freud elaborates on in his work The Interpretation of Dreams. As we discussed in class the past week there are a plethora of examples and spin offs of the Oedipus complex in the media since Freud’s time. This clip exemplifies how advertisers can use fundamental plot lines of stories, such as the Oedipus complex, to market their product.
In this short view the reason that the husband is able to get his wife’s attention back from their baby is by giving himself baby soft skin by using a Schick Quatro Titanium razor. However nonsensical this short is, its thematic and contents is in line with Freudian thought, with a slight variation. In the clip the baby, while it is still an infant, fights for the attention of his mother. This however is impossible in reality; nonetheless Freud’s description of this parallels this one. Freud suggests that the results of the Oedipus complex can affect children, specifically boys, and the effects thereof. He explains, “There is an unmistakable indication in the text of Sophocles’ tragedy itself that the legend of Oedipus sprang from some primeval dream-material which had as its content the distressing disturbance of a child’s relation to his parents owing to the first stage of sexuality. At a point when Oedipus, though he is not yet enlightened, has begun to feel troubled by his recollection of the oracle, Jocasta consoles him by referring to a dream” (816). This dream that Freud references can be parodied with the pictures on the wall of the basement that the baby is working out in. The recollection of what used to be, what he longs to have again.
I want to theorize a little bit about the last scene in this video clip, the baby confronts the father in the bathroom when he is shaving. Although the baby does not see itself in the mirror we can contemplate what may have happened in such an instance. Perhaps, I am straying too far from the topic with this theoretical exploration but up to this time, the video has not shown the child in the presence of a mirror. To reference Lacan as well, he explains, that before a child has seen its reflection in a mirror he/she characterizes him/herself based on the mother figure in the child’s life (1164). Suppose for a moment that the child saw his reflection in the mirror when he went to attack his father, what could have been different? I do not know that there is an answer to this, he could possibly have not had the desire anymore to attack the father, or he might have been too intrigued or surprised by his own appearance. There are various different scenarios that could have played out, assuming that this were an actual possibility. Another scenario as Lacan explains, “…in the case of a child [practices] a series of gestures in which he experiences in play the relation between the movements assumed in the image and the reflected environment, and between the virtual complex and the reality it reduplicates—the child’s own body, and the persons and things around him” (1164). I know it is a silly sort of thing to contemplate but as this video shows there are various different ways that the Oedipus complex can be displayed and I think that a combination of Lacan’s mirror stage could have created an entirely new element to this story.
The story of Oedipus can be a little bit confusing; however this video clip, though it may be silly clearly exemplifies this competition between father and son, or as Lacan broadens it, mother and daughter.
Works Cited
Freud, Sigmund. The Interpretation of Dreams. The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism Second Edition. Ed. Vincent Leitch.
Lacan, Jacques. The Mirror Stage As Formative. The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism Second Edition. Ed. Vincent Leitch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BA35ys91QJU&feature=related
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
analysis #2
Analysis #2Part 1
As I walk past the extravagant building I wonder what looms inside its walls. I see it every day on my walk to and from the bus stop and marvel at its beauty. In the morning it is an unimaginable white, the whitest white that I have ever seen. But at night, that is when its vast beauty is truly visible. The stained glass windows are illuminated with a welcoming glow. The lights surrounding the vast building emphasize its every angle. The gold plated man blowing a horn on the top of the tallest pillar is shinier than ever. I wonder what the inside looks like.
Years I have been passing this extravagant beauty and always wondered what it is, what’s inside. Today I venture to the marvelous white building, I am determined after six years of goggling at it to finally approach it, to stop wondering what the lights inside are lighting, and to see for myself. I walk curiously around the corner onto Charmant Drive and see huge white gates leading up the vast grass and into a surrounding parking lot. I approach the gates and see that there is a place for some sort of attendant to be at the entrance but the quaint room is vacant. I head towards the opening between the two gates and see the sign out in front on the matching white cement wall. It reads, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Mormons I think to myself. This building is owned by the Mormon Church. My brow furrows, and I stop before I enter the gates. I stare up at the beautiful building; it is closer than I have ever been to it before. I can now vividly see the grass and extravagant flower arrangements all around it. I glance at the sign again and read it softly to myself. Then I turn around and head towards my house without a turning back.
Part 2
For this analysis I am going to focus largely on Edmund Burke, specifically his ideas and opinions on the sublime. To begin, in the first part of this analysis I created a story of a man curious about a beautiful building that he sees every day, and one day he decides to take a closer look and find out exactly what it is. This is the first principle that Burke explains in his work “A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful.” He explains that it is the simplest emotion in the human mind (454). The story that I created also relates closely with what Burke explains as the motivation for one’s curiosity and that is passion. Various theorists that we have encountered thus far have touched on passion and how strongly it influences are decisions and more importantly our perceptions.
The two elements that I have explained thus far relate largely to Longinus’ depiction of the sublime. However, a very important difference that Burke exemplifies in his work is that the sublime is not secluded to pleasurable things alone, but also includes the painful or the negative. In relevance to the perception of the character that I created in part one of the analysis I want to refer to Section V. Joy and Grief in Burke’s text. In this section he explains the cessation of pleasure and that it affects the mind in three ways. He writes, “If it [pleasure] simply ceases, after having continued a proper time, the effect is indifference; if it be abruptly broken off, there ensues an uneasy sense called disappointment” (457). I will elaborate on the third principle after I relate this back to the story. The unnamed protagonist ventures to an extravagant building out of curiosity; however, when he discovers that it is a Temple for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints he is disappointed and decides to leave without fulfilling the goal that initially started his journey. The third stage or mindset reached is explained by Burke, “if the object be so totally lost that there is no chance of enjoying it again, a passion arises in the mind, which is called grief” (457). I found this definition of grief to be quite diverse to the common knowledge of it today. Here Burke explains that grief is not today’s understanding or deep sadness or depression, although he does not rule that out, he merely explains that the passion that was sparked by curiosity has been lost. The object of one’s desire can no longer be reached, or the desire to reach it is no longer relevant. In relationship to our character, he once walked past the temple awestruck and curious, and yet when he finds out what it really is he is disappointed and no longer desires to see the inside of it.
Although this is a somewhat silly story the explanation is valuable and relative. Burke explains that pleasure and pain are not opposing forces per say. Or more importantly they are not predicated on one another like the master/slave relationship proposed by Hegel. But rather, that they are two entities that create sublimity and beauty, and that there is a grey area between the two known as indifference.
Works Cited
Burke, Edmund. “A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful.” The Norton Anthology of Critical Theory & Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc., 2010. 454-460.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Presentation Reflection
For our presentation, presentation number one we pretty much split everything evenly into four aspects. I came up with the idea to play jeopardy and Cherie organized the layout. We decided to each choose one philosopher to create five questions on. The philosopher that I selected was Aristotle and I came up with five different levels of questions. Jessica made the PowerPoint, and ran it during our presentation. I created the rules, broke the class into groups, and facilitated the game. On a nonacademic note I also provided the tasty prize for the winning team.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Analysis #1 Response
Analysis #1—Classic Literary Criticism—Aristotle
For this first analysis the class has been discussing classical literary criticism focusing on three classical theorists; Gorgias, Plato, Aristotle, and Longinus. In order to illustrate an understanding and correlation between one of these theorists and society today I have created a connection between one of these theorists and a YouTube clip. The theorist I have selected is Aristotle, focusing particularly on his later text On Rhetoric. I will explain the YouTube clip, which illustrates the first segment of the presidential debate of 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon.
This YouTube clip is from the first segment of four derived from the first ever presidential debate which aired on September 26th 1960. This debate is between Senator John F. Kennedy of the Democratic Party and Vice President Richard Nixon from the Republican Party. One key element to this presidential debate is that it was not only the first ever presidential debate, but also the fist televised debate. However an interesting widespread dynamic is that those listening on the radio believed Nixon to be the winner; whereas, Americans watching the debate believed Kennedy to be the clear winner. This segment is dominated by Senator Kennedy’s opening argument, and the last three minutes by Vice president Nixon’s rebuttal. For this reason, I will focus largely on connecting Kennedy’s remarks to the elements that Aristotle depicts in his text.
One crucial element that Aristotle elaborates on in his text On Rhetoric is his three appeals. These three appeals can be coupled with the “Kennedy-Nixon Debate ¼ (1960)” to explain how these appeals are still prevalent in society centuries later. Each of the three appeals is illustrated in this video in Kennedy’s opening. The reason that this presidential debate has so many correlations to Aristotle’s three appeals is because of persuasion. Aristotle writes in On Rhetoric, “Persuasion occurs through the arguments when we show the truth or the apparent truth from whatever is persuasive in each case” (116). Persuasion is key in any presidential debate, because each candidate is essentially trying to win their over country, or to triumph over their opponent. Therefore each of these three appeals will be prevalent in this debate.
The first appeal is logos or the appeal to logic. In any political debate or intelligible argument an appeal to logic is crucial. Kennedy adheres to the logical appeal by elaborating on relevant concerns that the American public is concerned with in his argument. He discusses topics such as the Cold War, the fear of communism, economic instability, slavery, and various other relevant topics. In doing so he uses evidence, names of Communist powers, and their plans to instill fear in the American public; however, comfort by his proposed resolution to the issue of the rise and spread of communism.
In using these relevant examples of real world issues Kennedy also elaborates on a second appeal; ethos. In focusing on these real world issues all Americans are facing, Kennedy gains their trust. He uses ethos by focusing on the fears and concerns of the American public, both foreign and domestic issues. By illustrating these he is describing how they can both affect the American standard of living. Since he is running for office he has various foreign and domestic information outlets that the American public does not have access to and therefore can be seen as an authority figure for America to trust in.
The final of Aristotle’s appeals that Kennedy uses is possibly the most influential; pathos or an appeal to emotion. Overall, regardless of the viable factual evidence given by the candidate, regardless of the points that he makes on foreign and domestic issues, the way that he makes a voter feel outweighs everything. This is when the dominating element of persuasion comes into play. As Aristotle describes in his text On Rhetoric, “[There is persuasion] through the hearers when they are led to feel emotion [pathos] by speech; for we do not give the same judgment when grieved and rejoicing or when being friendly and hostile” (116). Kennedy opens strong in this debate. He exhibits his goals and desires for the up and coming nation and for its people. He speaks of hope, freedom, growth and wealth in the United States. Each of these elements is so important to Americans. These are all examples of appeals to emotion that Kennedy uses in his speech.
It is clear that Aristotle’s three appeals are still prevalent centuries later in public speaking, and they can be applied to various other examples as well.
Works Cited
Aristotle. On Rhetoric. The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism Second Edition. Ed. Vincent Leitch. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2010. 115-119.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Xn4ipHiwE&feature=fvw
For this first analysis the class has been discussing classical literary criticism focusing on three classical theorists; Gorgias, Plato, Aristotle, and Longinus. In order to illustrate an understanding and correlation between one of these theorists and society today I have created a connection between one of these theorists and a YouTube clip. The theorist I have selected is Aristotle, focusing particularly on his later text On Rhetoric. I will explain the YouTube clip, which illustrates the first segment of the presidential debate of 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon.
This YouTube clip is from the first segment of four derived from the first ever presidential debate which aired on September 26th 1960. This debate is between Senator John F. Kennedy of the Democratic Party and Vice President Richard Nixon from the Republican Party. One key element to this presidential debate is that it was not only the first ever presidential debate, but also the fist televised debate. However an interesting widespread dynamic is that those listening on the radio believed Nixon to be the winner; whereas, Americans watching the debate believed Kennedy to be the clear winner. This segment is dominated by Senator Kennedy’s opening argument, and the last three minutes by Vice president Nixon’s rebuttal. For this reason, I will focus largely on connecting Kennedy’s remarks to the elements that Aristotle depicts in his text.
One crucial element that Aristotle elaborates on in his text On Rhetoric is his three appeals. These three appeals can be coupled with the “Kennedy-Nixon Debate ¼ (1960)” to explain how these appeals are still prevalent in society centuries later. Each of the three appeals is illustrated in this video in Kennedy’s opening. The reason that this presidential debate has so many correlations to Aristotle’s three appeals is because of persuasion. Aristotle writes in On Rhetoric, “Persuasion occurs through the arguments when we show the truth or the apparent truth from whatever is persuasive in each case” (116). Persuasion is key in any presidential debate, because each candidate is essentially trying to win their over country, or to triumph over their opponent. Therefore each of these three appeals will be prevalent in this debate.
The first appeal is logos or the appeal to logic. In any political debate or intelligible argument an appeal to logic is crucial. Kennedy adheres to the logical appeal by elaborating on relevant concerns that the American public is concerned with in his argument. He discusses topics such as the Cold War, the fear of communism, economic instability, slavery, and various other relevant topics. In doing so he uses evidence, names of Communist powers, and their plans to instill fear in the American public; however, comfort by his proposed resolution to the issue of the rise and spread of communism.
In using these relevant examples of real world issues Kennedy also elaborates on a second appeal; ethos. In focusing on these real world issues all Americans are facing, Kennedy gains their trust. He uses ethos by focusing on the fears and concerns of the American public, both foreign and domestic issues. By illustrating these he is describing how they can both affect the American standard of living. Since he is running for office he has various foreign and domestic information outlets that the American public does not have access to and therefore can be seen as an authority figure for America to trust in.
The final of Aristotle’s appeals that Kennedy uses is possibly the most influential; pathos or an appeal to emotion. Overall, regardless of the viable factual evidence given by the candidate, regardless of the points that he makes on foreign and domestic issues, the way that he makes a voter feel outweighs everything. This is when the dominating element of persuasion comes into play. As Aristotle describes in his text On Rhetoric, “[There is persuasion] through the hearers when they are led to feel emotion [pathos] by speech; for we do not give the same judgment when grieved and rejoicing or when being friendly and hostile” (116). Kennedy opens strong in this debate. He exhibits his goals and desires for the up and coming nation and for its people. He speaks of hope, freedom, growth and wealth in the United States. Each of these elements is so important to Americans. These are all examples of appeals to emotion that Kennedy uses in his speech.
It is clear that Aristotle’s three appeals are still prevalent centuries later in public speaking, and they can be applied to various other examples as well.
Works Cited
Aristotle. On Rhetoric. The Norton Anthology of Theory & Criticism Second Edition. Ed. Vincent Leitch. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2010. 115-119.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Xn4ipHiwE&feature=fvw
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)