There are a number of reasons why the Marxist workers' utopia did not come to life. First of all, not everyone in the working class supported the notion of uniting against the “evil” capitalists. Many saw wage labor as an opportunity for advancement and prosperity. Also, aside from the poor workers, many others had accumulated considerable wealth that they would not readily be willing to give up. This was one of the reasons why the communist revolution in Russia took so many lives. Since there were many differences in income among workers from the start, the workers earning more were not willing to level off with everyone else. It is simply irrational to expect that everyone would support the same idea, especially with preexisting income differences. Also, most people are somewhat afraid of change, and thus it is logical to assume that people simply would not be willing to give up their somewhat stable lifestyles for some bleak and uncertain benefit.
Further along the way, after the world war 2, the idea of the worker's utopia started vanishing in the light of newly emerging capitalist countries. In comparison of the capitalist riches and opportunities to the poverty and degradation in communist states, the Marxist ideas of worker's class communes have lost their appeal. Hence, we may never know what this kind of life would look like, since the worker's utopia never actually took on its intended form and remains just an utopia.
Friday, July 16, 2010
Was the civil rights movement a successful revolution?
The civil rights movement was certainly a successful revolution, as can be seen from history and today. African Americans have achieved greater equality then and are able to enjoy the same treatment as everyone else today. The civil rights movement itself was not a silver bullet that could change everything at once, however, but it greatly contributed to the better lives of blacks in the United States. To get to the level of equality that we have today, it took a lot of time, effort, and dedication from who used to be the most underprivileged minorities in the US. Yet, even today, in some aspects of American social life, African Americans are still disadvantaged. Even around Pittsburgh, racial inequality can be seen in some black communities today. Yet, things are getting better and soon we can expect race to be a concept of low significance. This is perfectly demonstrated by the election of a black president in 2008. Thus, taking all the developments following the civil rights movement, it was successful in greatly advancing the civil rights of African Americans.
1.Is American pop culture similar to political propaganda?
American pop culture is only similar to political propaganda in the way that they're both selling something. In politics, it is the selling of political ideologies and ideas. This propaganda can be big or small. For example, the two big global ideologies during the cold war were communism and democracy, and they were both propagated all around the world. Other political propaganda can be seen on TV every single day, especially during times preceding some sort of elections. Fox news is especially known for propagating republican ideas, for example. The pop culture also has a lot to sell. From new musical genres to cigarettes, the pop culture can sell it. In a way, politics and pop culture are closely intertwined, depending on how one defines pop culture. Right before the presidential elections in 2008, a song by a very popular artist, “Whatever you like” by TI, came on the radios, which is believed by some to be a direct propaganda of the Obama campaign. There are more of these instances that can be found everywhere, especially on the internet. If you think about it, the internet is a part of pop culture that is used for all kinds of propaganda, including, in large part, political.
1.To what degree did Pittsburgh rebound? and Does Pittsburgh have some important qualities that helped it to rebound?
Pittsburgh, a former steel manufacturing Goliath, has certainly recovered successfully since its steel industry died down. Perhaps it is actually a good thing that Pittsburgh's steel legacy has ended. If you talk to the natives that still remember the steel “glory” days, you'd be surprised to hear that those times were not all that glorious. According to people that remember those times, the city was dirty and dark, which can be explained by pollution from the steel mills and the overpopulation. However, a fact that can't be denied is that the city thrived on steel. Nearly half a century later, the city is thriving once again and has even been called the most liveable city in the US. Even without the advantages that many coastal cities enjoy, Pittsburgh attracts people from all over the country and the world, which boosts the city's economy. The numerous universities make Pittsburgh one of the top destinations for those pursuing higher education in any field of study one could think of. The Pittsburgh health care industry has also become gigantic, especially UPMC. The qualities that helped Pittsburgh rebound are numerous. First of all, Pittsburgh has a bottomless pool of educated professionals. This is largely due to the academic culture of the city. The innovative minds of the pittsburghers are the other big reason for such success. Over time, Pittsburgh has moved from prosperity by means of natural resources to prosperity by thought, which is why even during the time of economic crisis, Pittsburgh is still advancing forward.
What is the future of democracy?
It seems to me that the future of democracy has only been uncertain immediately following the World War 2. After the cold war, democracy emerged as the leading political regime, especially with the success that the newly emerging democracies were having. Years later, today, democracies are still uncontested by any other regimes. Of course there's the communist China, where the economy is growing, but the quality of life is still lagging behind. Overall, the leaders in the world system today are mainly democracies. As far as the future is concerned, the world will keep on democratizing. The current non-democracies will become more democratic. This is inevitable because people in the world today are much more aware of what is going on in the world. The advancing technology is now harder than ever for the governments to control, and people are able to see how others live and compare it to their own lives. The countries that are already democratic, such as the US, will only grow more prosperous, something that Marx would argue with, but I can't imagine that the regime itself will change much. Freedom and choice are no longer the main concern, it seems. Democracies around the world today can be characterized by profit making and I feel that the existing democracies will only adapt to fit more efficient profit making models. This is not necessarily bad. This is just assuming that that the modern day democracies are not likely to get any more “democratic”.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Apprehending Transnationalism
Of the three readings we were assigned, the article or chapter assigned entitled, "Apprehending Transnationalism" is what I found most interesting. The author speaks of how trade has changed throughout the years. He also states that the convention of trade has been around since our own species in one form or another, which is quite astounding to consider. While imperialism at one point dominated through colonization, today we conduct trade in a much different fashion. It is no longer a compromise of culture or an involuntary sacrifice of property. Instead, we invite each other's cultures, serving as the wheels of globalization, mobilizing it and expanding it beyond imagination. The author speaks of how this is sometimes trivialized through commodities and states the example of having "African styled bathrooms" and things of this nature. Although it is relatively sad to think that we put elements of foreign culture to such a low level of appreciation, it still serves as a means of some kind of (bastardized) interest in other cultures.
The best definition I could come up with for transnationalism is simply the sharing of ideas, or "memes" to tie in a term we often throw around in class, across the political borders of different countries. What I find so fascinating is that we have gotten to a point where this is never given a second look. We constantly import products from other countries, so much so that it is hard to come across something made in the United States. Whereas it was once exotic, different and exciting to purchase something from a foreign nation, we now consume these items on a regular basis.
What transcends this? It seems all these products we regularly take for granted. We import our food, our technology, our furniture. People get excited about Persian rugs but even tea is no longer a big deal anymore these days. Of the items that are taken from other countries, what gets Americans most excited or, because of the luxury that we live in, have all the exotic knick-knacks from abroad become trivial?
A. Gorno
The best definition I could come up with for transnationalism is simply the sharing of ideas, or "memes" to tie in a term we often throw around in class, across the political borders of different countries. What I find so fascinating is that we have gotten to a point where this is never given a second look. We constantly import products from other countries, so much so that it is hard to come across something made in the United States. Whereas it was once exotic, different and exciting to purchase something from a foreign nation, we now consume these items on a regular basis.
What transcends this? It seems all these products we regularly take for granted. We import our food, our technology, our furniture. People get excited about Persian rugs but even tea is no longer a big deal anymore these days. Of the items that are taken from other countries, what gets Americans most excited or, because of the luxury that we live in, have all the exotic knick-knacks from abroad become trivial?
A. Gorno
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Roman Late - Final Readings
I was confused about the blogs due for today so this one on the final reading is late, sorry. I was in class today, so a lot of the material I'll discuss will be keeping the discussions from class in mind.
It's very strange that we have so many prefixes for nationalism. All seem to have similar definitions with slight details. What is different is the connotation that each word evokes. Nationalism, nowadays, is seen as an outdated, perilous word employed by countries long ago to rally citizens into war. Postnationalism has taken over as a term with a better connotation. It refers to the life we live now that nationalism is behind us. It is a (hopefully) more tolerant, understanding, and human mindset. Do you think nationalism is dead, or just out of style? What are the chances that it makes a comeback?
The quote from the book that we talked about in class was quite interesting. The idea of a global government, a unified earth, is so bizarre it certainly does evoke an eerie feeling of science fiction. I think it is possible that the world will go that way, but the series of events leading to such an alliance would certainly be costly in ways that are hard to predict.
Thanks for putting up with this late blog, I went back and commented on another one as well.
-Roman
It's very strange that we have so many prefixes for nationalism. All seem to have similar definitions with slight details. What is different is the connotation that each word evokes. Nationalism, nowadays, is seen as an outdated, perilous word employed by countries long ago to rally citizens into war. Postnationalism has taken over as a term with a better connotation. It refers to the life we live now that nationalism is behind us. It is a (hopefully) more tolerant, understanding, and human mindset. Do you think nationalism is dead, or just out of style? What are the chances that it makes a comeback?
The quote from the book that we talked about in class was quite interesting. The idea of a global government, a unified earth, is so bizarre it certainly does evoke an eerie feeling of science fiction. I think it is possible that the world will go that way, but the series of events leading to such an alliance would certainly be costly in ways that are hard to predict.
Thanks for putting up with this late blog, I went back and commented on another one as well.
-Roman
EXTRA CREDIT
Why did nationalism arose first in Europe?
Nationalism developed in Europe initially because of the democratization of politics. During the Industrial Revolution literacy increased, advancements in technology and communication increased as well, enabling a more efficient and speedier spread of information and thus emotion. This resulted in the development of a collective identity and transcended to a ready desire for 'national identity.' Politics, provided the opportunity to exploit this new found sentiment, stressing the right to self-determination. The idea of self-determination, and standard self-identity correlated to the growing assumption of defined territories. Defined Territories and inhabitants that can be mobilized.
Did Venice rise? Or did Genoa fell?
While Venice and Genoa experienced success during the thirteenth and early fourteenth century, Venice did indeed rise as Genoa fell in the late fourteenth century. Or rather Venice appeared to rise when in actuality it simply managed to continue to thrive while Genoa simply got the short end of the stick and could not continue to thrive. Genoa's inability to recover from the Black Death and the late fourteenth and then early fifteenth century naval defeats at the hand of Venice contributed to Genoa's fall. Genoa also lost commercial dominance and relevance due to other European competitors infringement upon Genoa's hegemony on the North Sea and unstoppable Central Asian fragmentation and fission disrupted transit trade. On the other hand Venice, which experienced the Black Death and the Great Depression, possessed a southern sea route that fortunately enabled Venice to monopolize the eastern trade- in narrower terms. Overall it was the sea routes that seemed to shape the fates of Venice and Genoa.
What does Hobsbawm mean by exoticism?
According to Hobsbawm, exoticism is a by-product of European expansion since the sixteenth century. Non-Europeans were treated as the moral barometer of European civilizations; they were considered beneath Europeans. Due to increased accessibility and global communication, the exotic became a component of western education on a daily basis in the form of novels geared towards young males (ie, Rohmer and May). Exoticism became an ideology, a reinforcement and justification for imperialism, since it reinforced European superiority. (Exoticism did provide intellectuals the ability to contemplate the differences between the western and the exotic, creating scholarships and theoretical reflections that contributed to the transformations of western social sciences.) Exoticism also permeated the art world and took an equal position in this sphere.
Is American pop culture similar to political propaganda?
American pop culture is similar to political propaganda, especially if one applies the critical approach to pop culture. Propaganda is a type of communication that has the intention to influence the attitudes of a community. Political propaganda certainly uses particular wording and imagery to strongly suggests a point of view to communities in order to solidify power. In terms of pop culture, one can definitely argue (and agree with Ardono and Horkeimer) that this phenomena can be compared to political propaganda: the addictive and influential films and music shaped by culture-producing firms solidify their power and social dominance. Culture is a form of social dominance and capitalism fuels the tools to manipulate culture. Pop culture can be used to highlight certain viewpoints/agendas that communities focus on rather than the reality, which parallels to political propaganda and its ability to influence communities to focus on certain issues that might be irrelevant, nonsensical, and detrimental to the community as a whole.
Why was religion suffering a crisis in the Western culture? How about today?
Religion suffered a crisis in Western culture because of the advancements of science and technology. Prior to the leap of scientific advancements, Western society applied 'intuition', 'common sense', 'essences', 'purpose of nature' etc. to explain the nuances of life. These supernatural or miraculous applications are buttressed in religion. The burgeoning of science divorced such applications and mathematics in particular helped articulate a new way to define the universe. Science simply created a intellectual autonomy that diminished the reliance upon religion which correlates to the rise of materialism during the late 19th and early 20th century. Today, religion is certainly suffering a crisis in Western culture. Today's Western culture (Granted, Western culture is diverse and there are still communities that rely heavily upon religion)- because of the defined secular and religious boundaries set due to the late 19th century- uses morality as the barometer for religious significance in one's life. An example is the Catholic Church and their distasteful cover ups of pedophilia. This causes people who associate themselves as Catholic question being apart of a religion that could participate such evil.
What is the future of democracy?
The inevitable evolution of society as a whole suggests that the nuances of democracy might shift in the future. But in terms of the information known about democracy, it readily coexists with capitalism. Furthermore, so long as capitalistic societies possess sturdy and thriving economies with minimal social unrest and discord, democracy (specifically bourgeois democracy) will remain. Granted, the number of well oiled democratic countries are limited- out of the 150 states that participate in the United Nations only a small number effectively operate bourgeois democracy. This illustrates the limitations on democracy- it is not a universal model for the future nor is it compatible with countries unexposed to staid constitutional governments. Ultimately the future of democracy depends upon the political, social, and economic state of a nation.
-Lolia
Nationalism developed in Europe initially because of the democratization of politics. During the Industrial Revolution literacy increased, advancements in technology and communication increased as well, enabling a more efficient and speedier spread of information and thus emotion. This resulted in the development of a collective identity and transcended to a ready desire for 'national identity.' Politics, provided the opportunity to exploit this new found sentiment, stressing the right to self-determination. The idea of self-determination, and standard self-identity correlated to the growing assumption of defined territories. Defined Territories and inhabitants that can be mobilized.
Did Venice rise? Or did Genoa fell?
While Venice and Genoa experienced success during the thirteenth and early fourteenth century, Venice did indeed rise as Genoa fell in the late fourteenth century. Or rather Venice appeared to rise when in actuality it simply managed to continue to thrive while Genoa simply got the short end of the stick and could not continue to thrive. Genoa's inability to recover from the Black Death and the late fourteenth and then early fifteenth century naval defeats at the hand of Venice contributed to Genoa's fall. Genoa also lost commercial dominance and relevance due to other European competitors infringement upon Genoa's hegemony on the North Sea and unstoppable Central Asian fragmentation and fission disrupted transit trade. On the other hand Venice, which experienced the Black Death and the Great Depression, possessed a southern sea route that fortunately enabled Venice to monopolize the eastern trade- in narrower terms. Overall it was the sea routes that seemed to shape the fates of Venice and Genoa.
What does Hobsbawm mean by exoticism?
According to Hobsbawm, exoticism is a by-product of European expansion since the sixteenth century. Non-Europeans were treated as the moral barometer of European civilizations; they were considered beneath Europeans. Due to increased accessibility and global communication, the exotic became a component of western education on a daily basis in the form of novels geared towards young males (ie, Rohmer and May). Exoticism became an ideology, a reinforcement and justification for imperialism, since it reinforced European superiority. (Exoticism did provide intellectuals the ability to contemplate the differences between the western and the exotic, creating scholarships and theoretical reflections that contributed to the transformations of western social sciences.) Exoticism also permeated the art world and took an equal position in this sphere.
Is American pop culture similar to political propaganda?
American pop culture is similar to political propaganda, especially if one applies the critical approach to pop culture. Propaganda is a type of communication that has the intention to influence the attitudes of a community. Political propaganda certainly uses particular wording and imagery to strongly suggests a point of view to communities in order to solidify power. In terms of pop culture, one can definitely argue (and agree with Ardono and Horkeimer) that this phenomena can be compared to political propaganda: the addictive and influential films and music shaped by culture-producing firms solidify their power and social dominance. Culture is a form of social dominance and capitalism fuels the tools to manipulate culture. Pop culture can be used to highlight certain viewpoints/agendas that communities focus on rather than the reality, which parallels to political propaganda and its ability to influence communities to focus on certain issues that might be irrelevant, nonsensical, and detrimental to the community as a whole.
Why was religion suffering a crisis in the Western culture? How about today?
Religion suffered a crisis in Western culture because of the advancements of science and technology. Prior to the leap of scientific advancements, Western society applied 'intuition', 'common sense', 'essences', 'purpose of nature' etc. to explain the nuances of life. These supernatural or miraculous applications are buttressed in religion. The burgeoning of science divorced such applications and mathematics in particular helped articulate a new way to define the universe. Science simply created a intellectual autonomy that diminished the reliance upon religion which correlates to the rise of materialism during the late 19th and early 20th century. Today, religion is certainly suffering a crisis in Western culture. Today's Western culture (Granted, Western culture is diverse and there are still communities that rely heavily upon religion)- because of the defined secular and religious boundaries set due to the late 19th century- uses morality as the barometer for religious significance in one's life. An example is the Catholic Church and their distasteful cover ups of pedophilia. This causes people who associate themselves as Catholic question being apart of a religion that could participate such evil.
What is the future of democracy?
The inevitable evolution of society as a whole suggests that the nuances of democracy might shift in the future. But in terms of the information known about democracy, it readily coexists with capitalism. Furthermore, so long as capitalistic societies possess sturdy and thriving economies with minimal social unrest and discord, democracy (specifically bourgeois democracy) will remain. Granted, the number of well oiled democratic countries are limited- out of the 150 states that participate in the United Nations only a small number effectively operate bourgeois democracy. This illustrates the limitations on democracy- it is not a universal model for the future nor is it compatible with countries unexposed to staid constitutional governments. Ultimately the future of democracy depends upon the political, social, and economic state of a nation.
-Lolia
Rachel-Mohammed A. Bamyeh-postnationalism
After World War II, post nationalism started to spread in Europe. Although both World War I and World War II were nationalist wars, the outcomes of the wars were very different. After World War II, Western Europe implemented strategies such as building structures and institutions in order to gain interdependence. At this time, the nations realized that being dominant over one another does not necessarily ensure peace and Western Europe wanted interdependence rather than a competition for dominance. Furthermore, sovereignty was becoming more widespread, which is another precondition for nationalism.
This article highlights important topics such as the three common features of post national culture, the four types of post national solidarity, spiritual solidarities, and material solidarities. I found the section discussing spiritual solidarities very interesting.For example, spiritual solidarities has to do with the growth of religion in the late 1970s. There were more weak interpretations of of Eastern spirituality being accepted in the west. This type promotes personal growth and for people to connect through the use of meditation. The other version, or "strong" version. In this, the spirituality is built through the formation of institutions such as schools, hospitals, and banks. How do wars affect religion and the religious practices of the society.
Furthermore, humanist solidarities are discussed later in the article. In this type of solidarity it is understood that within humanity there are shared interests. These shared interests go beyond that of economic competition and dominance for national borders. Examples of these shared interests are environmentalism, pacificism, human rights, femininsm, and many others. Also, the topic of life-emancipatory solidarities is discussed. These are all about liberation and freedom from areas of life that cause great restrictions. An example of the way this is expressed is through musical styles and youth movements. For instance, the popularity of rap music is such that it has spread to all different areas of the world. The increased discussion and expressionof homosexuality is another. Global trends are a major factor of life-emancipatory solidarities.
This article highlights important topics such as the three common features of post national culture, the four types of post national solidarity, spiritual solidarities, and material solidarities. I found the section discussing spiritual solidarities very interesting.For example, spiritual solidarities has to do with the growth of religion in the late 1970s. There were more weak interpretations of of Eastern spirituality being accepted in the west. This type promotes personal growth and for people to connect through the use of meditation. The other version, or "strong" version. In this, the spirituality is built through the formation of institutions such as schools, hospitals, and banks. How do wars affect religion and the religious practices of the society.
Furthermore, humanist solidarities are discussed later in the article. In this type of solidarity it is understood that within humanity there are shared interests. These shared interests go beyond that of economic competition and dominance for national borders. Examples of these shared interests are environmentalism, pacificism, human rights, femininsm, and many others. Also, the topic of life-emancipatory solidarities is discussed. These are all about liberation and freedom from areas of life that cause great restrictions. An example of the way this is expressed is through musical styles and youth movements. For instance, the popularity of rap music is such that it has spread to all different areas of the world. The increased discussion and expressionof homosexuality is another. Global trends are a major factor of life-emancipatory solidarities.
June 16th, 2010: Postnationalism, Apprehending Transnationalism
1. Summary:
The Postnationalism article is about the decrease in the nation-state perspective in the cultural space due to globalization. Bamyeh argues that the two main differences in nationalism and postnationalism are that you cannot discuss or think with a nationalistic state of mind without judging it with a set of morals and the single character of nationalism cannot compete with the more globally focused and spirited groups (outside of the nation). Bamyeh goes on to write that nationalism has been an extremely costly perspective and extremely destructive, by citing examples of ethnic cleansing, such as the holocaust. Bamyeh then goes on to discuss the European and American approach to postnationalism and the three common features of postnational culture.
The Apprehending Transnationalism article starts out discussing the free market and the sharing of culture and products (like iron ore) in the world trade market. The author then goes on to compare the American film industry with other country’s film cultures. It is obvious to state that Hollywood does and has controlled the film market for quite some time, but the author goes on to explain why this is. A critical point of confusion usually happens when people criticize and oppose the American film industry, when they really oppose the capitalist culture of the industry in general (and since the American film industry is the leader in the market – it becomes the “ruler” or scapegoat for criticism).
2. What I learned/found interesting:
In the Apprehending Transnationalism article, the author states that “… critics appear oddly superior to the consumer, who is a duped, passive object in a cultural industry that allows no variation, although somehow the critic can see their way out of this process, while the rest of the world can seriously debate which is better, Coke or Pepsi” (p. 17 – 18). I think this is a really good quote and a strong point brought up by the author.
3. Discussion Point:
Why is it that allows critics to appear superior to the consumer – yet they are consumers themselves? Is it the specialization in a field of pop culture? Could it be argued that a specialization in a field of pop culture is inferior to a more education driven degree such as teaching? I am not trying to say that one field is better than another but I do know that I have witnessed people meeting new people that study theater and they are scoffed at for their major.
The Postnationalism article is about the decrease in the nation-state perspective in the cultural space due to globalization. Bamyeh argues that the two main differences in nationalism and postnationalism are that you cannot discuss or think with a nationalistic state of mind without judging it with a set of morals and the single character of nationalism cannot compete with the more globally focused and spirited groups (outside of the nation). Bamyeh goes on to write that nationalism has been an extremely costly perspective and extremely destructive, by citing examples of ethnic cleansing, such as the holocaust. Bamyeh then goes on to discuss the European and American approach to postnationalism and the three common features of postnational culture.
The Apprehending Transnationalism article starts out discussing the free market and the sharing of culture and products (like iron ore) in the world trade market. The author then goes on to compare the American film industry with other country’s film cultures. It is obvious to state that Hollywood does and has controlled the film market for quite some time, but the author goes on to explain why this is. A critical point of confusion usually happens when people criticize and oppose the American film industry, when they really oppose the capitalist culture of the industry in general (and since the American film industry is the leader in the market – it becomes the “ruler” or scapegoat for criticism).
2. What I learned/found interesting:
In the Apprehending Transnationalism article, the author states that “… critics appear oddly superior to the consumer, who is a duped, passive object in a cultural industry that allows no variation, although somehow the critic can see their way out of this process, while the rest of the world can seriously debate which is better, Coke or Pepsi” (p. 17 – 18). I think this is a really good quote and a strong point brought up by the author.
3. Discussion Point:
Why is it that allows critics to appear superior to the consumer – yet they are consumers themselves? Is it the specialization in a field of pop culture? Could it be argued that a specialization in a field of pop culture is inferior to a more education driven degree such as teaching? I am not trying to say that one field is better than another but I do know that I have witnessed people meeting new people that study theater and they are scoffed at for their major.
EXTRA CREDIT
Was the civil rights movement a successful revolution?
I think the civil rights movement was a political and socioeconomic revolution that experienced success to an extent. The movement managed to dismantle the jim crow laws, overthrow the "separate but equal doctrine" and positively reshape the social position of African Americans. However, a successful revolution dismantles the institutions that caused the conflict to begin with. When one observes the state of the African American community, one can note the significant strides (ie., President Obama, thriving middle class community, etc.) that are due to the civil rights movement. However, the institution of racism is still intact, though subtle. Especially when one notes that affirmative action exists and the discrepancies of wealth and political power are still prevalent.
Why didn't it work out? Why didn't the workers succeed in creating the worker's utopia?
The world is too ethnically and culturally diverse to successfully create the worker's utopia. Though certain aspects connect the working class globally, overall it would be quite difficult to create a uniformed belief system. Who would determine the universal culture and language? How could this be determined? How exactly will the universe obtain peace? Utopia was a vague vision, an ideal that was not even grounded in pragmatic and applicable theory. The reality- as conflict between the proletariats and bourgoisie upon the approach to progress increased, revolutions in industrialization, nationalism and imperialism unfolded. The Europeans asserting a utopia seemed unable to recognize that such assertions are still westernized revelations that will never achieve permenance.
-Lolia
I think the civil rights movement was a political and socioeconomic revolution that experienced success to an extent. The movement managed to dismantle the jim crow laws, overthrow the "separate but equal doctrine" and positively reshape the social position of African Americans. However, a successful revolution dismantles the institutions that caused the conflict to begin with. When one observes the state of the African American community, one can note the significant strides (ie., President Obama, thriving middle class community, etc.) that are due to the civil rights movement. However, the institution of racism is still intact, though subtle. Especially when one notes that affirmative action exists and the discrepancies of wealth and political power are still prevalent.
Why didn't it work out? Why didn't the workers succeed in creating the worker's utopia?
The world is too ethnically and culturally diverse to successfully create the worker's utopia. Though certain aspects connect the working class globally, overall it would be quite difficult to create a uniformed belief system. Who would determine the universal culture and language? How could this be determined? How exactly will the universe obtain peace? Utopia was a vague vision, an ideal that was not even grounded in pragmatic and applicable theory. The reality- as conflict between the proletariats and bourgoisie upon the approach to progress increased, revolutions in industrialization, nationalism and imperialism unfolded. The Europeans asserting a utopia seemed unable to recognize that such assertions are still westernized revelations that will never achieve permenance.
-Lolia
Final Readings
Bamyeh’s piece is about how we’ve learned our lessons from the great world wars and how nationalism is not such a good idea. He illustrates how the Europeans get the post nationalist thing started by creating interdependencies among various countries. He chastises America for still hanging on to imperialism. Bamyeh then breaks post national culture into four categories: Religion, material possessions, humanist and liberation. In Halle’s piece we see how the Europeans tried to force the bourgeois culture on any one who stood in their way. How American culture is nearly hegemonic related to the film industry. The American film culture industry actually turns foreign people away from their own culture. When people get too critical of globalization it leads to romantic nationalism or statism. In the Patomaki and Teivainen piece we see how the area called Mercosur (Which is made up of the five countries: Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela) is transitioning into a more European style democracy. He goes on to explain how the society functioned after the military dictatorships by keeping private property rights. We see how human rights groups have been working the Mercosur. They’ve put in place some protections to prevent military coups. The Andean community may move towards a European style parliament soon.
How silent films were marketed internationally but when sound was added it forced them to become regional. The fact that Argentineans and Uruguayans identify themselves with Europe. I’ve never heard the term Mercosur.
In Bamyeh’s piece he speaks of how America is neo colonialist and then cites the examples of the war in Kosovo and the Persian Gulf. We liberated Kuwait from the Iraqis and we protected the Muslims from being killed by the Serbs in Kosovo, how the hell is that considered colonialism?
How silent films were marketed internationally but when sound was added it forced them to become regional. The fact that Argentineans and Uruguayans identify themselves with Europe. I’ve never heard the term Mercosur.
In Bamyeh’s piece he speaks of how America is neo colonialist and then cites the examples of the war in Kosovo and the Persian Gulf. We liberated Kuwait from the Iraqis and we protected the Muslims from being killed by the Serbs in Kosovo, how the hell is that considered colonialism?
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Final Readings
Baymeh starts off by explaining the key terms related to postnationalism, such as nationalism, transnationalism, and globalization. He then goes on to talk about the progress of postnationalism in Europe, specifying the European Union as the biggest product of postnationalism. The Author goes on to the topic of postnationalism, or rather the lack of it, in the United States, and how it did not follow the European example in the post-nationalist era. He goes on to talk about the features of the postnationalist culture, drawing heavily from the examples of the cold war era. Finally, he outlines the coincepts of the postnational culture by putting it in terms of four types of solidarities:spiritual, material, humanist, life-emancipatory. These have to do with religion, socio-economic classes, global causes, and the spread of and deviation from pop culture, respectively.
Ah...sideways reading is always fun. The article "apprehending transnationalism" focuses on the globalization and capitalism as a factor in the film industry. Particularly, Halle talks about the American domination of the film industry. Halle defends the American "cultural occupation" with his arguments of differentiating it from the military occupation, thus portraying it harmless. He then goes on to talk about the history of the international film, going as far back as the silent era in the film-making. In the end, the author gives the reader "guidelines" for apprehending transnationalism. Overall, this peace seems overly opinionated and, frankly, quite uninteresting.
The main focus of the third article was the "cosmopolitan democracy" and the Mercosur region. The authors also explain such concepts as globalization, neoliberal globalization, and their effects on the Mercosur region. The most interesting part, to me, discusses the possibility of the Mercosur regional integration, similar to the EU's integration in Europe. The authors recognize the implications of such movements. This article is particularly interesting to me, as it touches upon the idea of what is to me the ultimate world society. Even if we can't achieve a "world union", unification by regions would be the next viable option, as it would very likely eliminate, or at least lower the threat of hegemonic states dominating and taking advantage of the smaller states. A question for discussion is then quite consequential from the previous statement: would this kind of world system work? Or would it be impossible to get everyone up to speed in regions such as Africa?
Ah...sideways reading is always fun. The article "apprehending transnationalism" focuses on the globalization and capitalism as a factor in the film industry. Particularly, Halle talks about the American domination of the film industry. Halle defends the American "cultural occupation" with his arguments of differentiating it from the military occupation, thus portraying it harmless. He then goes on to talk about the history of the international film, going as far back as the silent era in the film-making. In the end, the author gives the reader "guidelines" for apprehending transnationalism. Overall, this peace seems overly opinionated and, frankly, quite uninteresting.
The main focus of the third article was the "cosmopolitan democracy" and the Mercosur region. The authors also explain such concepts as globalization, neoliberal globalization, and their effects on the Mercosur region. The most interesting part, to me, discusses the possibility of the Mercosur regional integration, similar to the EU's integration in Europe. The authors recognize the implications of such movements. This article is particularly interesting to me, as it touches upon the idea of what is to me the ultimate world society. Even if we can't achieve a "world union", unification by regions would be the next viable option, as it would very likely eliminate, or at least lower the threat of hegemonic states dominating and taking advantage of the smaller states. A question for discussion is then quite consequential from the previous statement: would this kind of world system work? Or would it be impossible to get everyone up to speed in regions such as Africa?
Patrick Garner-Final Readings
In Baymens article "Postnationalism he thinks that people focus more on ideas and values. Hence he thinks the world is becoming more in depth with globalism and going against nationalism, which would be postnationalism. He describes four types of postnational solidarity. THey are spirtual, material, humanist, and life-emancipatory. The author also talks about the growth of postnationalism in europe after WW2. He also speaks of how the U.S did not adopt postnationalism and developed a form of imperialism.
In Halle's reading, "Apprehending Transnationalsim", globalization and capitalism are discussed. He discusses how trade and free market were were majorily important to globalization. Global trade is something that has been around all throughout history. He discusses that this was a huge cause of globalization. Throughout the rest of the reading the author speaks of the film industry. He talks about the differences between American Films and other films such as European Films. He then shows that American films eventually became more popular than European films when there were disputes about adding sound to the films. This is when American films took over the power.
The last article "Responses to Beoliberal Globalization in the Mercosur Region", went very in depth with globalization. It starts with defining the basic concepts; globalization and civil public space. This article also discussed the cosmopolitan democracy. The author then describes globalization effects. Such as saying that it caused societies to follow neoliberal ideology. The author also discuesses the cosmopolitan response to neoliberal ideology. In conclusion of the reading the author thinks that globalization can create new possibilities within political society but steers away from possibilities of politics. Hence, Mercosur area is probably going to be unsuccessful .
I found it interesting that American Film took over the market due to adding sound and voice. I never knew that the European market actually was a competitor with the American film industry. It is funny how being susceptible to change hindered europes film industry.
Do you think it is possible that such advancements that we do not even know of could rise up and help other film industries rise above the american film industry? COuld such events happen in the future such as WWI and the voice and sound addition to movies?
In Halle's reading, "Apprehending Transnationalsim", globalization and capitalism are discussed. He discusses how trade and free market were were majorily important to globalization. Global trade is something that has been around all throughout history. He discusses that this was a huge cause of globalization. Throughout the rest of the reading the author speaks of the film industry. He talks about the differences between American Films and other films such as European Films. He then shows that American films eventually became more popular than European films when there were disputes about adding sound to the films. This is when American films took over the power.
The last article "Responses to Beoliberal Globalization in the Mercosur Region", went very in depth with globalization. It starts with defining the basic concepts; globalization and civil public space. This article also discussed the cosmopolitan democracy. The author then describes globalization effects. Such as saying that it caused societies to follow neoliberal ideology. The author also discuesses the cosmopolitan response to neoliberal ideology. In conclusion of the reading the author thinks that globalization can create new possibilities within political society but steers away from possibilities of politics. Hence, Mercosur area is probably going to be unsuccessful .
I found it interesting that American Film took over the market due to adding sound and voice. I never knew that the European market actually was a competitor with the American film industry. It is funny how being susceptible to change hindered europes film industry.
Do you think it is possible that such advancements that we do not even know of could rise up and help other film industries rise above the american film industry? COuld such events happen in the future such as WWI and the voice and sound addition to movies?
Final Readings
In the aritcle "Postnationalism", Baymen argues that the world is going through a stage of growing postnationalism and globalism. Rather than people binding themselves to countries through nationalism, they began binding themselves to values and ideals. His argument consists of 3 common features of postnational culture: perspectivist fragmentation, autonomous non-state centered action, and micropolitics; and also 4 types of postnational solidarities: spiritual, material, humanist, and life-emancipatory.
In "Apprehending Transnationalism", Halle discusses transnationalism and globalization in the film industry. Capitalism played a major role in shaping modern day trade and globalization. Halle defends America's cultural imperialism and states that it is important to know differences when comparing Hollywood cinema with other national cinema. The author then describes patterns of internationalism and globalization of the silent film industry in Europe. Then, the addition of sound and voice (along with WWI) hindered cooperation among filmmakers in Europe, allowing Hollywood to become the hegemonic film power.
Patomäki and Teivainen's article describes cosmopolitan democracy and globalization in South American countries. It begins by explaining the consequences of a Eurocentric view of the effects of globalization and then goes on to define key terms such as globalization and civic public space. The authors then detail cosmopolitan responses to social and political problems brought forth by globalization. These responses include: changing social relations by region, trans-regionalism, and global actions. The authors conclude that globalization both impedes political possibilities, but at the same time allows for the formation of new political possibilities. However, they believe that the Mercosur region will not be successful.
I found the film article to be the most interesting. I never knew that Europe cooperated in film productions prior to the introduction of sound. I had always assumed that they just made films for their own countries, with little interaction between them with regards to the cinema industry. If Hollywood had gotten involved with the European film manufacturers (and cooperation survived the World Wars), what type of effects do you think this would have on modern cinema globally?
-Derek Leidemann
In "Apprehending Transnationalism", Halle discusses transnationalism and globalization in the film industry. Capitalism played a major role in shaping modern day trade and globalization. Halle defends America's cultural imperialism and states that it is important to know differences when comparing Hollywood cinema with other national cinema. The author then describes patterns of internationalism and globalization of the silent film industry in Europe. Then, the addition of sound and voice (along with WWI) hindered cooperation among filmmakers in Europe, allowing Hollywood to become the hegemonic film power.
Patomäki and Teivainen's article describes cosmopolitan democracy and globalization in South American countries. It begins by explaining the consequences of a Eurocentric view of the effects of globalization and then goes on to define key terms such as globalization and civic public space. The authors then detail cosmopolitan responses to social and political problems brought forth by globalization. These responses include: changing social relations by region, trans-regionalism, and global actions. The authors conclude that globalization both impedes political possibilities, but at the same time allows for the formation of new political possibilities. However, they believe that the Mercosur region will not be successful.
I found the film article to be the most interesting. I never knew that Europe cooperated in film productions prior to the introduction of sound. I had always assumed that they just made films for their own countries, with little interaction between them with regards to the cinema industry. If Hollywood had gotten involved with the European film manufacturers (and cooperation survived the World Wars), what type of effects do you think this would have on modern cinema globally?
-Derek Leidemann
Final Readings
The first article on postnationalism argues that increased globalization decreases the emphasis on culture restricted by national boundaries. Postnationalism began to rise in Europe after the nationalist driven World War 2. Peace was maintained through a guarantee of interdependence and the dilution of sovereignty. In the United States, instead of replacing nationalism with postnationalism, the US developed a new form of imperialism, as a desire to fill a power void arose with the end of the Cold War. The author of the article views this philosophy as irrational. The imperial state and the overdeveloped state stand in the way of globalization and postnational culture. From a political structure, we need to consider modals of partial control. There are four types of postnational solidarity: spiritual, material, humanist, and life-emancipatory. These four solidarities represent freedom.
The second article on apprehending transnationalism discusses the relationship between globalization and capitalism. Free market and trade are essential components in globalization. Global trade can be traced all throughout human history. Some critics however, see the Americanization associated with free market as endangering national cultures, rather than bringing disparate peoples together. The article goes one to talk about the effects globalization has had on national film production. Instead of forming a postnational era of cinema, we are in a transnational one.
The third article dealt with the neoliberal globalization in the Mercosur Region. This article discussed the idea of cosmopolitan democracy. Giving the increasing globalization, we must rethink the political community in which democracy can be realized. Before entering discussion, the authors take time to offer their definition of globalization, civic public space. They then go on to describe the effects of globalization, claiming that it created a widespread adoption of the neoliberal ideology, and created public spaces in Latin America that transcend state borders. The author describes the cosmopolitan response to neoliberal globalization, and calls for an attempt to change social relations on a regional basis. The Mercosur integration process has been influenced by the EU's trans-regionalism model. However, the fact that there has been little transnational co-operation between Mercosur political parties should be taken into account before there is an attempt to copy EU-like institutions into a different historical context. Because of the differences, copying the EU institutional design in the Mercosur region is unlikely to be successful.
I found the final article to be most interesting. It is intriguing that a Latin America region would respond to globalization by attempting to model after the European Union. Despite the Eurocentrism, there exists a desire to embrace global democracy and reject the hegemonic ideas of the United States. This is yet another example of a distain for the power that the United States holds. I find it interesting to view this from other nations' perspectives. Having lived in a hegemonic US my entire life, I do not understand what it is like to live outside a hegemony. Perhaps if I did, I too would want more to see an increased global democracy rather than a dominating hegemony.
For discussion, do you think that the Mercosur region will succeed in establishing institutions similar to the EU, or will the differences of the region keep them from doing so?
Blog #10
Bamyeh Postnationalism
Europe started nationalistic ideals which branched out to postnationalism. Nationalism is something we can readily talk about since it's in our recent history. According to the reading it is either good or bad. Most forms of nationalism are alike, since they all stemmed from the European model. It called for costly wars and activities that devastated the world. Many see globalization as a way to forgo nationalistic ideas. Globalization seeks out alternative ways to form relationships and bonds without doing so nationalistically. Post nationalism is harder to define, it is neither all good nor all evil. It is a relatively new philosophy that has yet to play out and has an unforeseen future. In each human are four different values. The first is interests, which allows camaraderie through material possessions. The second is universality, which allows fellowship through mutual human ideals. For example, feminism and human rights.The third is freedom, including individual freedom and freedom of expression. Music is a common form of free expression as well as art. The last form is spiritual solidarity.
Halle Apprehending Transnationalism
Europe started nationalistic ideals which branched out to postnationalism. Nationalism is something we can readily talk about since it's in our recent history. According to the reading it is either good or bad. Most forms of nationalism are alike, since they all stemmed from the European model. It called for costly wars and activities that devastated the world. Many see globalization as a way to forgo nationalistic ideas. Globalization seeks out alternative ways to form relationships and bonds without doing so nationalistically. Post nationalism is harder to define, it is neither all good nor all evil. It is a relatively new philosophy that has yet to play out and has an unforeseen future. In each human are four different values. The first is interests, which allows camaraderie through material possessions. The second is universality, which allows fellowship through mutual human ideals. For example, feminism and human rights.The third is freedom, including individual freedom and freedom of expression. Music is a common form of free expression as well as art. The last form is spiritual solidarity.
Halle Apprehending Transnationalism
Globalization in one sense opens up the world to new markets, greater production, and promotes human interdependence. It is both desired and criticized. America has had an impact on the world's media, both through our own media and our industry. The author tries to make a unbiased account on the American film industry and how past critics had judged it. I feel like this part was somewhat confusing, several of the names were unfamiliar. Statism was a very interesting topic. I found the concept of freezing the present in an attempt to live in the past very poignant. Some see the future, via inventions, technology in a bad light. They only see the glory of the past not the vision of the future. But culture is not only one time period, it evolves with the population. Culture cannot be stopped and withheld from changing. Some protagonists for statism view the upkeep of heritage and tradition as the only way to live in the present. The example of the German family being seen as not adequate entertainment from an amusement park as they would through a traditional hike through the Black Forest.
Patomaki Critical Response to Neoliberal Globalization
Cosmopolitan democracy is a political organization that is more flexible than a normal democracy. It is not solely about a strong central government. The people have more influence on the decisions being made. Globalization is about expanding social systems and restructuring social space. Neoliberal globalization in the most general way makes the rich richer and the poor poorer. It promotes the elites and strengthens their position within the society and country. The role of the middle class is mainly decreased. And the state of living for the majority of the population has decreased, poverty has increased
What role will postnationalism play in the future? Has the world seen the end of destructive nationalism?
-Kayla O
Make-up blogs. BEH & MIU-10
Before European Hegemony 3-184
The first part of the book focuses mainly on the trade practices which existed before the trade domination by Europe. This includes the different trading fairs, or the Champagne fairs, which served as sort of a gateway into the global trade. With the decline of the fairs, the commercial epicenter shifted to the Flander's cities, Bruges and Ghent. These two cities became the trading posts for european countries such as Italy and Britain, and served as a connector to the middle Eastern countries. With the Black Death wiping out large populations, the trade decreased and the “survival of the fittest” law took effect, as Venice emerged as the new commercial giant. The author later goes into discussion of the main middle eastern trade routes and the dominance of these routes, and the trade, by the Mongol Empire. During the Mongol Empire, foundations of the world trade system were starting to be formed and, closely resembled the trade structure of today's world, although, of course, on a much smaller scale.
The most fascinating event of the discussed time period to me was the spread of Black Death. It is a perfect example of the negative consequences of the global trade and capitalism. Carl Marx would probably be fast to note it as an instance of “capitalism destroying itself”. I wonder if there is something today that could do so much damage to the world trade? Global warming, perhaps?
Before European Hegemony 185-373
In the second half of the book, the author discusses the importance of the middle eastern countries, as well as China and India, along with their trade routes, in the world trade system. One of the most important trading routes was through the Red Sea, with India, and the numerous land routes to China. Much has changed when the Portuguese successfully completed their ambitious sail around Africa, thus eliminating the need for the Middle Eastern routes, which turned disastrous for the Middle eastern, especially Egyptian, economies. China's later withdrawal from the trade system was a devastating blow to the world system as it fell apart.
This last part does not really make that much sense to me, personally. Why would China make such a decision, when it had all the means necessary to become the world hegemon? Perhaps if it wasn't for that, we would be living in a China-dominated world even today? And, perhaps, there would never be a need for the Chinese revolution and the establishment of communism. Who knows?
Mix It Up 10
In this chapter, the author talks about the role of the internet in the modern age. He discusses the good and the bad sides of the newly emerged “virtual” world. Some of the good sides are that a lot of information is available instantly, although it may be overwhelming, which is not so good. He discusses the benefits of online video games, which can stimulate one's thinking and be otherwise beneficial to one's mental development, a statement I would disagree with. Grazier also talks about the bad side of the online world, giving examples such as the gambling student and the suicidal myspace girl. These cases are extreme and fail to show the complete picture. While someone gambles away thousands of dollars, someone else comes up with a fresh idea and makes millions. Or, while someone is thinking of suicide due to what someone said on myspace, someone else uses that same website to find the love of their life. Thus, I believe that there will always be the good and the bad, just as with anything else in this world. For a discussion question I will ask this: What do you, personally, think is better for you, a game of football/soccer/whatever sport or 5 hours playing warcraft? And there you go.
The first part of the book focuses mainly on the trade practices which existed before the trade domination by Europe. This includes the different trading fairs, or the Champagne fairs, which served as sort of a gateway into the global trade. With the decline of the fairs, the commercial epicenter shifted to the Flander's cities, Bruges and Ghent. These two cities became the trading posts for european countries such as Italy and Britain, and served as a connector to the middle Eastern countries. With the Black Death wiping out large populations, the trade decreased and the “survival of the fittest” law took effect, as Venice emerged as the new commercial giant. The author later goes into discussion of the main middle eastern trade routes and the dominance of these routes, and the trade, by the Mongol Empire. During the Mongol Empire, foundations of the world trade system were starting to be formed and, closely resembled the trade structure of today's world, although, of course, on a much smaller scale.
The most fascinating event of the discussed time period to me was the spread of Black Death. It is a perfect example of the negative consequences of the global trade and capitalism. Carl Marx would probably be fast to note it as an instance of “capitalism destroying itself”. I wonder if there is something today that could do so much damage to the world trade? Global warming, perhaps?
Before European Hegemony 185-373
In the second half of the book, the author discusses the importance of the middle eastern countries, as well as China and India, along with their trade routes, in the world trade system. One of the most important trading routes was through the Red Sea, with India, and the numerous land routes to China. Much has changed when the Portuguese successfully completed their ambitious sail around Africa, thus eliminating the need for the Middle Eastern routes, which turned disastrous for the Middle eastern, especially Egyptian, economies. China's later withdrawal from the trade system was a devastating blow to the world system as it fell apart.
This last part does not really make that much sense to me, personally. Why would China make such a decision, when it had all the means necessary to become the world hegemon? Perhaps if it wasn't for that, we would be living in a China-dominated world even today? And, perhaps, there would never be a need for the Chinese revolution and the establishment of communism. Who knows?
Mix It Up 10
In this chapter, the author talks about the role of the internet in the modern age. He discusses the good and the bad sides of the newly emerged “virtual” world. Some of the good sides are that a lot of information is available instantly, although it may be overwhelming, which is not so good. He discusses the benefits of online video games, which can stimulate one's thinking and be otherwise beneficial to one's mental development, a statement I would disagree with. Grazier also talks about the bad side of the online world, giving examples such as the gambling student and the suicidal myspace girl. These cases are extreme and fail to show the complete picture. While someone gambles away thousands of dollars, someone else comes up with a fresh idea and makes millions. Or, while someone is thinking of suicide due to what someone said on myspace, someone else uses that same website to find the love of their life. Thus, I believe that there will always be the good and the bad, just as with anything else in this world. For a discussion question I will ask this: What do you, personally, think is better for you, a game of football/soccer/whatever sport or 5 hours playing warcraft? And there you go.
Neoliberal globalization
It starts by describing how capitalism has helped to bring about globalization by doing things such as expanding markets, raising production, and by introducing new ideas to new cultures that came along with capitalism. It also describes that it is sometimes hard to tell if these changes that are coming about are good or bad for the places they are occurring. It goes on to say that if good things didn't come with entering the global market then there wouldn't be the desire to enter the market that there is. It then tells of some of the troubles of globalization, such as the crushing and dilluting of foreign cultures. One example used is that of the Hollywood film industry that is so immense that smaller foreign film industries can have a hard time competing. Statism, the belief that the state should preserve the culture of the state, and some of the problems that arise with that are then discussed. A few of those problems being that statism brings about a freeze to culture in the state, and it also deprives states of other cultural impacts by somewhat shutting them off from other cultures. It then shows how film was able to leap boundaries that other forms of medium were not able to leap. Also, it discusses some of the debates that have risen from this new international film market, such as the controversy that arose in Germany because of the film Schindler's List.
I found it interesting that the movies the Patriot and Schindler's list caused controversy in England and Germany. I guess I can see how the film the Patriot would rub the British the wrong way, it is rather gaudy and full of overblown myths. It is always interesting to see how countries react to things that happened years ago. I also found the stance interesting that just because culture becomes a more international things doesn't necessarily mean that the culture goes away. The idea that different cultures should be spread is a good one. Also, I feel that having different cultural influences can be a really good thing. There are many things that can be learned from other cultures.
Chris N
The Disney Movie
Out of the three videos we watched in class I found the Disney one the most interesting. It was neat to see all of the ways in which Disney movies actually shape the way in which children view different races, beliefs, and even their perspective of history. The examples given and clips shown from different Disney movies were very interesting to see how different races were portrayed in these movies. One comment that really struck me was when they were talking about native Americans and how, when children were asked to dance like them, they would jump up and down and hit their hand over their mouths. I can specifically remember kids doing this in elementary school, and I began thinking about how much different Disney movies actually shape kids perspectives on the world.
The more I began to think about this I realized that I do not think that Disney are the only people to blame. Growing up kids are exposed to all kinds of media, much of which have stereotypes, and certain expectations for the sexes of characters and how they interact with their world around them. These perspectives shape how people view the world but I also feel that they are rooted in our society by people themselves. Stereotypes would not exist if they were extremely inaccurate and not to be racist but there is some truth behind stereotypes. I think that there is a reason stereotypes develop and while it is definitely wrong to assume something about someone because of their race or sex, some of the stereotypes are somewhat truthful. Even in many sitcoms today there are mothers attempting to get their daughters to be married, this is just one example I can think of that was referenced in Disney movies. I think that many of these stereotypes are created by the society itself, and then simply exploited in the media, I do not think that the media creates these types of stereotypes. What do you guys think?
Lastly I just wanted to comment about the part where they talk about video games and toys destroying kids imagination. I do think it is important that kids play outside and discover the world on their own, but I also think that video games develop certain things such as analytic skills that are not easily learned by playing in the yard. I think that a healthy combination of play outside for physical development and video games for intellectual development is optimal for children. Do you guys think kids should stop playing video games or have them incorporated into their play?
The more I began to think about this I realized that I do not think that Disney are the only people to blame. Growing up kids are exposed to all kinds of media, much of which have stereotypes, and certain expectations for the sexes of characters and how they interact with their world around them. These perspectives shape how people view the world but I also feel that they are rooted in our society by people themselves. Stereotypes would not exist if they were extremely inaccurate and not to be racist but there is some truth behind stereotypes. I think that there is a reason stereotypes develop and while it is definitely wrong to assume something about someone because of their race or sex, some of the stereotypes are somewhat truthful. Even in many sitcoms today there are mothers attempting to get their daughters to be married, this is just one example I can think of that was referenced in Disney movies. I think that many of these stereotypes are created by the society itself, and then simply exploited in the media, I do not think that the media creates these types of stereotypes. What do you guys think?
Lastly I just wanted to comment about the part where they talk about video games and toys destroying kids imagination. I do think it is important that kids play outside and discover the world on their own, but I also think that video games develop certain things such as analytic skills that are not easily learned by playing in the yard. I think that a healthy combination of play outside for physical development and video games for intellectual development is optimal for children. Do you guys think kids should stop playing video games or have them incorporated into their play?
Conceptions of Global Culture
Bamyeh's "Postnationalism" contends that globalization reduces the scope in which nation-state culture can be expressed yet expands the scope of solidarity, thus altering the original construction of nationalism. Bamyeh identifies four central human values that explain this newfound solidarity: interests induce material solidarity; universality increases humanist solidarity; freedom augments life-emancipating solidarity; and deep meaning increases spiritual solidarity. Though these four values allegedly exist within nationalism, globalization dismantled and reassembled these values. Postnationalism embraces fragmented values, does not readily exist within the scope of state ideology and embraces an acquired indentity.Bamyeh examines the origins and politically induced impediments of postnationalism; the author also examines the essential differences between nationalism and postnationalism.
Halle's "Apprehending Transnationalism" focuses on transnationalism in cinema. Halle defines and distinguishes globalization from transnationalism. Globalization is an economic process that
alters the fluidity of economic/monetary funding of commodity relations. Transnationalism is an associative and "ideational" network that constructs public spheres and new formulations of community. In concept of transnationalism does not alter national cinema. Halle defines national cinema and shifts to examining the operation of other forms of national communities. Halle notes that national media should not be brushed with assumptions of "minority or hegemony status, " particularly when one might thoughtlessly want to immediately compare other national media with United States media as the gold standard.
Patomaki and Teivainen's "Critical Responses to Neoliberal Globalization in the Mercosur Region: Roads Towards Cosmopolitan Democracy" attempts to connect actual world historical processes to cosmopolitan democracy models by citing the neoliberal globalized political discourse incited in Mercosur region of Latin American which provided the groundwork for cosmopolitan democracy. Patomaki and Tevaninen redefine the concept of cosmopolitan democracy in political economy terms. The authors also provide definitions for the rudimentary concepts they discuss in the article- "globalization", "democracy", and "civic public spaces". The authors also create nuanced categorizations of transnational and supranational reactions to globalization. The authors discuss the problems induced by financial globalization and the repressive dominating nature of the globalizing economy and the imaginative and radical reform the participants of the Mercosur region.
Out of all of the articles, I found it interesting that Halle warns of the "cultural imperialism." Halle seems to suggests that it is patronizing to think certain national cultures are vulnerable to Americanization. The author further wonders that this fear of cultural imperialism is not the desire to protect authenticity but perhaps the unspoken desire to thwart progress.
Also, I wonder about Bamyeh's dissatisfaction with Benedict Anderson's assertion. Anderson does not believe in any possible alternatives to nationalism. Just because nationalism is a successful ideology does not mean it is a stagnant. However, Bamyeh believes that nationalism will never disappear but I wonder if perhaps, though successful and strong, nationalism might one day disappear?
-Lolia
Halle's "Apprehending Transnationalism" focuses on transnationalism in cinema. Halle defines and distinguishes globalization from transnationalism. Globalization is an economic process that
alters the fluidity of economic/monetary funding of commodity relations. Transnationalism is an associative and "ideational" network that constructs public spheres and new formulations of community. In concept of transnationalism does not alter national cinema. Halle defines national cinema and shifts to examining the operation of other forms of national communities. Halle notes that national media should not be brushed with assumptions of "minority or hegemony status, " particularly when one might thoughtlessly want to immediately compare other national media with United States media as the gold standard.
Patomaki and Teivainen's "Critical Responses to Neoliberal Globalization in the Mercosur Region: Roads Towards Cosmopolitan Democracy" attempts to connect actual world historical processes to cosmopolitan democracy models by citing the neoliberal globalized political discourse incited in Mercosur region of Latin American which provided the groundwork for cosmopolitan democracy. Patomaki and Tevaninen redefine the concept of cosmopolitan democracy in political economy terms. The authors also provide definitions for the rudimentary concepts they discuss in the article- "globalization", "democracy", and "civic public spaces". The authors also create nuanced categorizations of transnational and supranational reactions to globalization. The authors discuss the problems induced by financial globalization and the repressive dominating nature of the globalizing economy and the imaginative and radical reform the participants of the Mercosur region.
Out of all of the articles, I found it interesting that Halle warns of the "cultural imperialism." Halle seems to suggests that it is patronizing to think certain national cultures are vulnerable to Americanization. The author further wonders that this fear of cultural imperialism is not the desire to protect authenticity but perhaps the unspoken desire to thwart progress.
Also, I wonder about Bamyeh's dissatisfaction with Benedict Anderson's assertion. Anderson does not believe in any possible alternatives to nationalism. Just because nationalism is a successful ideology does not mean it is a stagnant. However, Bamyeh believes that nationalism will never disappear but I wonder if perhaps, though successful and strong, nationalism might one day disappear?
-Lolia
Monday, June 14, 2010
Class Videos
Today we watched three videos in class, each dealing with threats to modern society. The first video criticizes governments around the world for attempting to regulate freedom in cyberspace. The second video points out the flaws in our copyright laws, stating that any work created before the 1920s is public, but anything after is copyrighted. The third video criticizes Disney's approach to stereotypical racist and sexist character portrayals in children's films. I found the first video to be most interesting. Barlow idealizes the concept of lawless cyberspace, and for the most part, I agree with him. It is interesting to look at attempts by countries to exclude material that they deem unsuitable.
Due to the complex interconnections of the internet, it is impossible for a country to regulate censorship or piracy through standard means. However, Barlow's idea of a self governing system of the internet is pretty far-fetched; the viewpoints of the masses are too varied to come to a consensus, let alone enforcing them. The internet is a place without political borders, the only two ways that regulation could (maybe) be achieved is: 1. completely shut off your country from the rest of the internet (North Korea, and to a lesser extent, China), or 2. create some single organization or one world government that controls everything on the internet. Any interaction outside of the closed system would offer a gateway into ideas possibly not permissible to the host government. Even in this situation there is still ample room for contraband content to be passed through public-key cryptography or anonymous data distribution networks such as Tor and Freenet. Attempting to break massive amounts of encryptions is essentially infeasible, even for large governments. It is estimated to take 15 million computers a year to crack 1 RSA-1024 key and every message sent could use a different key. So while it possible to scan regular internet traffic, such is not the case with when encryption is brought into the picture. Cryptography can be analogous to gun control, if you ban guns the criminals will keep them and only the good will turn them in. The same would be present with cryptography, criminals would still continue to use it, and it is trivial to implement (unlike gun manufacturing). Thus, it is evident that no matter how hard governments try, complete internet censorship and regulation will never be a reality any time soon.
-Derek Leidemann
Due to the complex interconnections of the internet, it is impossible for a country to regulate censorship or piracy through standard means. However, Barlow's idea of a self governing system of the internet is pretty far-fetched; the viewpoints of the masses are too varied to come to a consensus, let alone enforcing them. The internet is a place without political borders, the only two ways that regulation could (maybe) be achieved is: 1. completely shut off your country from the rest of the internet (North Korea, and to a lesser extent, China), or 2. create some single organization or one world government that controls everything on the internet. Any interaction outside of the closed system would offer a gateway into ideas possibly not permissible to the host government. Even in this situation there is still ample room for contraband content to be passed through public-key cryptography or anonymous data distribution networks such as Tor and Freenet. Attempting to break massive amounts of encryptions is essentially infeasible, even for large governments. It is estimated to take 15 million computers a year to crack 1 RSA-1024 key and every message sent could use a different key. So while it possible to scan regular internet traffic, such is not the case with when encryption is brought into the picture. Cryptography can be analogous to gun control, if you ban guns the criminals will keep them and only the good will turn them in. The same would be present with cryptography, criminals would still continue to use it, and it is trivial to implement (unlike gun manufacturing). Thus, it is evident that no matter how hard governments try, complete internet censorship and regulation will never be a reality any time soon.
-Derek Leidemann
Disney is the Devil
I've always had a bit of a hint that Disney was kind of bad. I recently read fast food nation in which they discuss the origins of the company and also Walt Disney himself being a bit questionable. But the last documentary we watched in class really brought a lot to light for me. What stood out most was questions of racism and of sexism. It's true that there are no minority characters in a lot of the stories. However, it seems that a lot of times the bad guys are usually racial minorities as far as the animal characters.
If this is far-fetched, I think the overt notions of sexism are not. The female characters are always incredibly vulnerable and do rely quite heavily on male characters to get them out of trouble. Many times the female characters don't have mothers. I think this lends to the vulnerability. As a child, I always found myself disappointed at reenactments that I would see of the Disney Princesses on TV. The reason probably was that real women are not proportioned the way that the Princesses are! All of the female protagonists in Disney cartoons have a large bust and teeny, tiny waists. It's not that these things are particularly outrageous. Like Lou said, is it possible to have anything entirely politically correct? Probably not. However, it does not seem like a preferable thing to promote. Not only that, but who wants to expose their children to such nonsense?
I guess my question would be will it ever stop? Even while I was watching this documentary, I was thinking, but I still really like Disney! As long as Disney still appeals to children will there ever be an end? Will the reign of Disney ever cease, especially considering how wealthy the corporation is and how much power they have considering all they own?
A. Gorno
If this is far-fetched, I think the overt notions of sexism are not. The female characters are always incredibly vulnerable and do rely quite heavily on male characters to get them out of trouble. Many times the female characters don't have mothers. I think this lends to the vulnerability. As a child, I always found myself disappointed at reenactments that I would see of the Disney Princesses on TV. The reason probably was that real women are not proportioned the way that the Princesses are! All of the female protagonists in Disney cartoons have a large bust and teeny, tiny waists. It's not that these things are particularly outrageous. Like Lou said, is it possible to have anything entirely politically correct? Probably not. However, it does not seem like a preferable thing to promote. Not only that, but who wants to expose their children to such nonsense?
I guess my question would be will it ever stop? Even while I was watching this documentary, I was thinking, but I still really like Disney! As long as Disney still appeals to children will there ever be an end? Will the reign of Disney ever cease, especially considering how wealthy the corporation is and how much power they have considering all they own?
A. Gorno
The Disney One
While I found most of the people in the video to be pretentious intellectual elitists, I'll allow that they did make some interesting points. There is blatant racism and stereotyping in Disney's movies. Also the sexism and the pushing of the female ideal were really interesting to see, especially in animal form. What's scary to me is to think that kids are watching this garbage in their most formative years. These are the things that will stay with them and I can even think back about how I was misinformed by some stupid Disney movie.
But what really annoyed me about all these blow hards in the movie was that they think Disney has some kind of responsibility to the public. These people will sit there all day and talk about freedom of expression but as soon as something comes along that doesn't fit with their agenda they immediately change their tune. Yeah it does racially profile characters and yeah it is sexist but they can do whatever they want. If you don't like don't let your stupid kids see it. What especially frustrated me was the woman at the end talking about how commercialized it is and how that was the most upsetting thing about it. Disney is a company, and the objective of all companies is to make money. Again, just don't buy all the junk if you have such a big problem with it. So while I don't agree with what Disney peddles, I would argue to the end their right to peddle it. This is America for Christ's sake.
Chris N
Death to Disney (NOT!)
I found the two Disney videos to be both enlightening and annoying at the same time. It was interesting to see how Disney keeps getting congress to extend the copyright laws so that no one can get a hold of their precious mouse character and the extent to which they go to promote and protect their image. I found the last video to be a little over the top particularly the way that they portray a lot of the Disney stories. While it’s true that they have made some questionable decisions regarding race and stereo types you have to keep in mind many of these stories are old fairy tales—which some of those old stories are pretty horrible—and these stories were written in a different time period. Unfortunately, a time period where racism and sexism where more accepted. It seemed like the in the last video they were sort of cherry picking small slights to ethnic minorities and amplifying them to rather large proportions, probably most children don’t even pick up on this stuff. It seems to me that this is just political correctness running amok. It also seemed to me that Disney is trying to make their newer movies more compliant with the new politically correct paradigm. A lot of these movies just simply reflect an unfortunate reality. Sometimes the bad guys win, life is not always fair and sometimes you have to flutter your eyelashes to get what you need.
Can you make a story that is completely politically correct, without offending anyone and still make for a good story?
Lou Coban
Can you make a story that is completely politically correct, without offending anyone and still make for a good story?
Lou Coban
In class movies
Out of all of the videos, I found the Disney documentary to be the most interesting. I think it is important to analyze media that is aimed at children. This documentary in particular took a critical approach, and examining their claims can be useful in understanding how we should approach Disney and the media that children are exposed to. The film raised many important issues, from gender roles, to history, to racism. I found myself agreeing with some claims, while disagreeing with others, and will lay out my thoughts in this blog post.
The first thing to mention is that when one examines the Disney films of the past, it is clear that the films use stereotypes, as well as altered history. There are obvious issues with this, as the documentary points out, but there is a factor that they overlook. In pointing out the flaws, the documentary fails to recognize that Disney is trying to craft a story, and therefore must use certain devices. For example, the film mentions the Beast's temper in Beauty and the Beast, and the condoning of it. However, the reason for the temper of the Beast is to create a conflict to be resolved. Without conflict, you have a week and boring story. The Beast, in this instance, is troubled by his past, and is therefore angry and lonely. This causes him to lash out a Belle, but overtime she helps him to accept his circumstance, and he is able to change. This doesn't seem wrong to me, but the documentary takes a biased approach in this case. Disney also uses gender and racial stereotypes as storytelling shortcuts, so we understand how a character fits into the film. Furthermore, the documentary condemns Disney films for altering history. Again, this is only done in the name of storytelling, which I believe is Disney's top priority.
Does this mean that it is okay to use stereotypes and altered history in children's films? Far from it actually. I'm just pointing out that it is understandable that Disney would use such devices. Many were common in animation for their time period, and Disney was just following suit.
The most important thing is for parents to be aware of the stereotypes that exist in past Disney films, so they can explain them to their kids. I do not believe we should shelter children from Disney, as it is one of the greatest forms of entertainment a child can have, and will give them lasting memories. It is the responsibility of the parent, however, to understand what their kids are watching, learning, and absorbing. If aware, parents can use these movies and teaching tools.
Looking forward, I believe Disney has a responsibility to avoid stereotypes in their films and marketing. We are living in a different age, where we are more aware of the way kids learn and develop. We are also constantly advancing in our social knowledge, and we are creating a world where tolerance and acceptance are at the forefront. It is possible to create films without stereotypes, and Disney must be aware of the lessons that they are teaching kids.
Patrick Garner-Class Videos 6/14/10
I found the last video we watched today (Disney Video) the most entertaining. It basicly discussed how Disney is such a monopoly that they almost dictate the movies, toys, clothes, etc. parents buy there childeren. They also discussed that Disney owns so many other company's such as ESPN and ABC that they never let anything bad be said about them. Most importantly the video discussed how characters are portrayed especially how women and men should be. It also discussed stereotyping races to certain characters such as the crows in Dumbo were portrayed as African Americans.
I found this extremely interesting that some parents and adults are so angry about these Disney movies. What we all have to recognize is that most of the movies such as Dumbo were made around 1930 and 1940. If I remember correctly it was 1942. This was how society was brought up back then and things that were spoken of such as the way women and men were portrayed and even different races were portrayed was ok at that time. Yes, things have changed and they are better but these movies are extremely old and if you do not want childeren to see them do not let them watch them. There are a ton of movies made after the fact that are more appropriate for our society. My other argument is that Disney was not always as big as a Monopoly as it is today. When it first started it gradually became very popular. So obviously people enjoy the products from Disney even from the beginning and the goal of any company is to make money. If your company is making money then why change your techniques that the majority of society likes so much.
As for the discussion question. Do you really think the way disney portrays things in there movies are a big problem, particularily the way some of the people on the video made such a big deal about how men and women are portrayed. I really do not think it is a big deal because in society today pretty much all movies and things of this sort portray men and women all the same way. Eventually childeren will see things of this sort and my opinion is that we cannot sugar coat everything for childeren. From the people I grew up with, the kids that lived sheltered lifestyles went crazy when they got freedom in college and did things their parents had nightmares about. In my opinion, I think all those people on that video suck the fun out of everything and need to look at the entertainment and enjoyment that many people get from Disney products. For the record, Disney has themeparks out of the country in Tokyo, Paris, Hong Kong, and Shanghai. A big portion of profits come from these parks and some have even more demand than the parks in the U.S. Therefore I do not think the way some ethnicities are portrayed, such as Asian, make anyone from over there too angry.
I found this extremely interesting that some parents and adults are so angry about these Disney movies. What we all have to recognize is that most of the movies such as Dumbo were made around 1930 and 1940. If I remember correctly it was 1942. This was how society was brought up back then and things that were spoken of such as the way women and men were portrayed and even different races were portrayed was ok at that time. Yes, things have changed and they are better but these movies are extremely old and if you do not want childeren to see them do not let them watch them. There are a ton of movies made after the fact that are more appropriate for our society. My other argument is that Disney was not always as big as a Monopoly as it is today. When it first started it gradually became very popular. So obviously people enjoy the products from Disney even from the beginning and the goal of any company is to make money. If your company is making money then why change your techniques that the majority of society likes so much.
As for the discussion question. Do you really think the way disney portrays things in there movies are a big problem, particularily the way some of the people on the video made such a big deal about how men and women are portrayed. I really do not think it is a big deal because in society today pretty much all movies and things of this sort portray men and women all the same way. Eventually childeren will see things of this sort and my opinion is that we cannot sugar coat everything for childeren. From the people I grew up with, the kids that lived sheltered lifestyles went crazy when they got freedom in college and did things their parents had nightmares about. In my opinion, I think all those people on that video suck the fun out of everything and need to look at the entertainment and enjoyment that many people get from Disney products. For the record, Disney has themeparks out of the country in Tokyo, Paris, Hong Kong, and Shanghai. A big portion of profits come from these parks and some have even more demand than the parks in the U.S. Therefore I do not think the way some ethnicities are portrayed, such as Asian, make anyone from over there too angry.
6/14/2010 - Class Videos
After watching today's class videos, I found the last one - the Critical Look at Disney the most interesting, so this is the one I would like to focus on. I really found the analysis of disney movies and their "monopoly" on the children's market. They really do dictate how children consider and view our history and what seems to be important in our society. For example, skinniness for girls and relying on men and not being able to be dependent, men to be all muscles, that the English got back on the boat to go back to their main land and leave the new found land for Indians, the lack of African American presence in cartoons, and the use of the chihahua as the latin character. These are just some of the examples that the people interviewed in the video pointed out and are all really good points. I know myself that I have heard little white kids that I was babysitting to pass the "skin colored" crayon (and it just so happens to be peach - indicating light colored skin) which they obviously have no way of knowing how incredibly offensive it is. As sad as this is, it is the reality we live in today. It was just this year (some almost 80 years after Disney was started) that they just came out with their first movie starring a black child from New Orleans (Princess and the Frog). Even though in this movie, the black female (the main star) is the hard working independent girl, yet she still falls in love and ends up marrying a prince.
Although I realize how true these observations are of Disney and the pattern in which they occur in, when I first heard such suspessions I thought they were totally ridiculous. The most publicized problems I have heard of with Disney until today's class is the sex undertones in the cartoons and in the muppets. I realize that I had simply dismissed these allegations as many people had done with the examples I had mentioned above from the video. I guess I cannot help but wonder what would happen if disney focused more efforts on truer storytelling and less racist and sexist movies. What would cause Disney to ever head down this direction?
Although I realize how true these observations are of Disney and the pattern in which they occur in, when I first heard such suspessions I thought they were totally ridiculous. The most publicized problems I have heard of with Disney until today's class is the sex undertones in the cartoons and in the muppets. I realize that I had simply dismissed these allegations as many people had done with the examples I had mentioned above from the video. I guess I cannot help but wonder what would happen if disney focused more efforts on truer storytelling and less racist and sexist movies. What would cause Disney to ever head down this direction?
Roman - Class Videos
In class today we viewed videos on the Cyber Declaration of Independence (cool graphics by the way), copyrights as they relate to restricting our freedom, and Disney as a questionable media mogul. All of the videos brought up how the idea of technology as something that can drastically change our worlds. I found the video on Disney to be the most interesting.
The documentary on Disney had some valid points. We often look at Disney as such an icon of purity and we rarely associate business with the classic tales. However, Disney is very much a business that needs to stay afloat and succeed. This is fine, but the content Disney has provided is now being analyzed and is often found to present dangerous ideas to young, impressionable children. Themes of racism are present in certain movies as are images of unrealistic women helpless without a male companion.
Do you think Disney, as a company in control of impressionable content, has a responsibility to its viewers? Or do you think the responsibility falls on parents to screen their children from certain harmful ideas from Disney? Who's at fault or is there really any problem at all?
-Roman
The documentary on Disney had some valid points. We often look at Disney as such an icon of purity and we rarely associate business with the classic tales. However, Disney is very much a business that needs to stay afloat and succeed. This is fine, but the content Disney has provided is now being analyzed and is often found to present dangerous ideas to young, impressionable children. Themes of racism are present in certain movies as are images of unrealistic women helpless without a male companion.
Do you think Disney, as a company in control of impressionable content, has a responsibility to its viewers? Or do you think the responsibility falls on parents to screen their children from certain harmful ideas from Disney? Who's at fault or is there really any problem at all?
-Roman
Mix It Up ch. 10-Rachel
Changes in the forms of communication we use everyday affect the way we interact with others and the way we perceive the world. Some argue that video games enhance certain skills in individuals such as decision making skills for the professional world, problem solving, and achieving complex goals. People are constantly surfing the internet, reading blogs, emails, and reading their news online. The book discusses potential affects this may have on us. Due to the decrease in article lengths and the short capsule summaries now even featured in the New York Times could be affecting the way we focus while reading and our ability to absorb detailed information. An interesting fact and something I learned is that playing games online can be quite addicting for some and every year, about $60 billion is illegally gambled through online Poker games.
Not only has the increase of technology affected our lives in those ways, there are some major health risks involved as well. An increase in loneliness and a lack of face-to-face contact is a major problem. Also, this loss of personal connection had been associated with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and rheumatoid arthritis. It can also be a struggle for some to maintain positive images of themselves if they post pictures or communicate their actions with others online. That information can spread very quickly, and one cannot always control where that information goes. An interesting point to discuss would be how we have been affected either positively or negatively by the media or how it has affected our close family and friends.
Not only has the increase of technology affected our lives in those ways, there are some major health risks involved as well. An increase in loneliness and a lack of face-to-face contact is a major problem. Also, this loss of personal connection had been associated with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and rheumatoid arthritis. It can also be a struggle for some to maintain positive images of themselves if they post pictures or communicate their actions with others online. That information can spread very quickly, and one cannot always control where that information goes. An interesting point to discuss would be how we have been affected either positively or negatively by the media or how it has affected our close family and friends.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Mix it Up Ch 10
Chapter ten deals with how media affects not only how we communicate but how we interpret messages. Interestingly, video games are said to facilitate collateral learning, while textbooks and reading are explicit learning. The zone is a place where we can go where society norms are held at bay or temporarily suspended. A break from reality that more and more people are drawn to via the internet. The idea of face to face contact is seen as cumbersome and less people are apt to do it. Virtual life can alter and change a person's real life. Either in a relationship, divorce, love, hate, envy. All these emotions can be felt for real through the internet. Sites like Rate my Professor can be used by more than students. For example, lawyers, employers and fellow faculty. Privacy on the internet is very rare commodity. That linked with how many people lie, cheat, and all around mean. It's a harsh reality for a naive person.I found the part talking about the Chinese digital sweatshops really fascinating. I had no idea gamers paid for upgrades earned by others on ebay. and that it was someones job to play this game for hours in order to earn upgrades that can then be sold. Where do you belive the internet will take us in the future? Is culture spread via digital media more so than actual life?
I thought the videos in class today were interesting. The first video was visually very distracting. On to the Disney movie, I am partial to Disney as I grew up on them. After saying that, I believe Disney movies should not be so over analyzed. They are first and primarily a top corporation whose sole goal is to make money. They know what makes money and especially what sells. Marketing is key to their success as their brands and icons are featured on hundreds of items. I thought the people talking in the movie were a making big deal out of Disney's movies, but why just Disney? Are they analyzing every children's movie producer, for example Pixar (Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc.), Dreamworks (Madagascar 1 and 2), 20th Century Fox (Ice Age series)? Are moveis these movies meant to be analyzed or enjoyed?
-Kayla O
I thought the videos in class today were interesting. The first video was visually very distracting. On to the Disney movie, I am partial to Disney as I grew up on them. After saying that, I believe Disney movies should not be so over analyzed. They are first and primarily a top corporation whose sole goal is to make money. They know what makes money and especially what sells. Marketing is key to their success as their brands and icons are featured on hundreds of items. I thought the people talking in the movie were a making big deal out of Disney's movies, but why just Disney? Are they analyzing every children's movie producer, for example Pixar (Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc.), Dreamworks (Madagascar 1 and 2), 20th Century Fox (Ice Age series)? Are moveis these movies meant to be analyzed or enjoyed?
-Kayla O
Mix it Up (chapter 10)
We start out with this chapter explaining how the Nigerian e-mail scam is actually a newer form of the Spanish prisoner scam that has been around for quite some time. What will become of the news media in the internet age? Playing the video Grand Theft auto is actually good for you because it teaches you how to better react to constantly changing situations. How people can sometimes get addicted to games, particularly gambling games. How “top gamers” achieve a Zen like state of conscience while playing. The line between the real and the digital world is becoming blurred. We learn the details of a very sad case of online bullying. How the traditional printed news media seems to be obsolete and may soon be gone. Although, others argue that there may be a few major papers left. However, this is little consolation for small town news readers. Anyone can post anything on the internet but it’s not necessarily true nor does it go through the normal process of vetting, fact checking, proof reading, etc. Finally we learn of the arcane nature of the current copyright laws.
The fact that the Nigerian scam has actually been around for so long, I thought it was relatively new.
The current copyright laws extend to 70 years. I believe copyrights, like patents, should expire after 15 years. After that time period people should be able use your work in any way they feel. If they decide to sell the work that they’ve created based on your work, they should have to pay you a small percentage of the profits until your death. Do you agree?
Lou Coban
The fact that the Nigerian scam has actually been around for so long, I thought it was relatively new.
The current copyright laws extend to 70 years. I believe copyrights, like patents, should expire after 15 years. After that time period people should be able use your work in any way they feel. If they decide to sell the work that they’ve created based on your work, they should have to pay you a small percentage of the profits until your death. Do you agree?
Lou Coban
Mix It Up - Ch10
Chapter 10 discusses the ways in which technology influences modern society and popular culture. It begins by stating the pros and cons of video games and online gambling. Complex video games can assist in cognitive development, expanding one's problem solving abilities, and training leaders. However, both video games and online gambling can become addicting to the users. Technology addictions can cause many problems due to lack of face to face communications. Next, the author explains the fusion of the real world and virtual worlds, such as video game economies and anonymous rating of professors. Newspapers all over the country are encountering problems making profit, due to the abundance of free online news sources. Finally, Grazian covers the three trends of media in the digital age: convergence of content across platforms (movies, books games), participation of audiences to produce content (youtube), and collective intelligence as media power (open source software).
I found it interesting that such a good argument was made toward the benefits of video games. I had already thought that it could help in developing logic and problem solving abilities, but it never really occurred to me that the same type of leadership in an online MMO could resemble that required by corporations.
For discussion, do you think that in the future watching video game tournaments will become a spectator sport? Blizzard has been pushing for this with Startcraft and the World of Warcraft Arenas; worldwide invitational's are held each year and broadcast live. The reason I think they will not catch on is that they do not offer spectators anything to attach themselves to. For instance, in Pittsburgh we can get excited for the Steelers or Penguins because they represent us. However, in these online tournament, it is basically just some no-name people with no connections to the spectators.
-Derek Leidemann
P.S. I used to play wow quite a lot years ago, and none of the games being played in the picture on page 202 are World of Warcraft, I don't know where he got his info.
I found it interesting that such a good argument was made toward the benefits of video games. I had already thought that it could help in developing logic and problem solving abilities, but it never really occurred to me that the same type of leadership in an online MMO could resemble that required by corporations.
For discussion, do you think that in the future watching video game tournaments will become a spectator sport? Blizzard has been pushing for this with Startcraft and the World of Warcraft Arenas; worldwide invitational's are held each year and broadcast live. The reason I think they will not catch on is that they do not offer spectators anything to attach themselves to. For instance, in Pittsburgh we can get excited for the Steelers or Penguins because they represent us. However, in these online tournament, it is basically just some no-name people with no connections to the spectators.
-Derek Leidemann
P.S. I used to play wow quite a lot years ago, and none of the games being played in the picture on page 202 are World of Warcraft, I don't know where he got his info.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Patrick Garner- Mix it Up Chp. 10
In Chapter 10 of Mix it Up, Grazian discusses the growth of technology. He discusses the way society has evolved with the new technology and abilities along with how it has affected industry over the years. In the very beginning of the chapter Grazian speaks of the Nigerian e-mail scam. He basicly opens up with this to show how easy it is to be taken advantage of in this day and age. He then goes into how everything with technology is quickly paced and the way we read is not as thorough as it used to be because of the way the internet is set up with breif summaries and headlines. Grazian then speaks of how people no longer communicate in person as much as we used to. It takes away the normal people skills that society used to have and many people are just so used to using portable devices. Information travels much more quickly. Although it is extremely efficient people are becoming lazy and very dependent on portable devices. Also, games such as world of War craft give people a chance to live a life as someone else and is un heard of in any other day and age.
What I found extremely interesting is that in society today we are extremely efficient with information flow and communication. However, it is scary how dependent people are on the technology we have and if we ever lose the technology we have who knows what will happen. Basicly, it is crazy that something that works so good can still have negative effects on society.
This leads me to my question. Do you think society is too dependent on the technology that we have? Will technology eventually dig a hole to deep where society cannot resort back to older ways of communication and interaction? What do you think?
What I found extremely interesting is that in society today we are extremely efficient with information flow and communication. However, it is scary how dependent people are on the technology we have and if we ever lose the technology we have who knows what will happen. Basicly, it is crazy that something that works so good can still have negative effects on society.
This leads me to my question. Do you think society is too dependent on the technology that we have? Will technology eventually dig a hole to deep where society cannot resort back to older ways of communication and interaction? What do you think?
Mix it up Chapter 10
In this chapter of Mix It Up Grazian discusses how the internet provides consumers information. It seems as though that Grazian attempts to show how the internet is mostly harmful to people by giving a few grim examples of people who have been negatively affected by online activities. One of which who committed suicide after learning a boyfriend she thought was real, was simply a lie. Grazian also discusses the positive side of video games, which he claims and supports help kids develop important analytic and problem solving skills. Also he claims that MMORPG's help people train to become natural leaders in the real world from their online experiences. Do you think video games overall are helpful to people? or do you think they are detrimental? Personally it is sometimes sad to see people who are fully enveloped by a game and fail to interact successfully in the real world and lose their social life, but on the other hand these games do usually offer challenging puzzles that make people think and develop new strategies to solve these problems.
I think that video games in moderation are definitely a good way to exercise your brain and keep you sharp. The argument of people becoming aggressive after playing video games such as grand theft auto is not acknowledged in this chapter but it is a subject of hot debate. Do you think video games can really inspire violence? or do you think the people who become aggressive were that way to being with and it was bound to happen sooner or later?
Lastly on the topic of the internet begin helpful or hurtful Grazian talks about how people get less truth from online sources. This point I cannot argue, there are hundreds of thousands of websites with wrong information, but I think this should make people smarter and more careful. By now hopefully most people know that you can't always trust what is read online so it should make people search for reliable sources, or multiple sources to make sure what they found is correct. Do you think this massive amount of information in one place that is easy to access is better overall? or worse? Grazian also attempts to point out some of the negative parts of the internet which is respectable but the arguments he uses are from people who already had problems to begin with. If someone is truly addicted to gambling they will gamble, whether its online or at a casino its the nature of the person, not the technology that enabled it. Also the girl who committed suicide had issues with depression before the incident on MySpace. Do you think that these people really would have been better off without the internet? or do you think these events were bound to happen sooner or later and they just happened to occur online?
I think that video games in moderation are definitely a good way to exercise your brain and keep you sharp. The argument of people becoming aggressive after playing video games such as grand theft auto is not acknowledged in this chapter but it is a subject of hot debate. Do you think video games can really inspire violence? or do you think the people who become aggressive were that way to being with and it was bound to happen sooner or later?
Lastly on the topic of the internet begin helpful or hurtful Grazian talks about how people get less truth from online sources. This point I cannot argue, there are hundreds of thousands of websites with wrong information, but I think this should make people smarter and more careful. By now hopefully most people know that you can't always trust what is read online so it should make people search for reliable sources, or multiple sources to make sure what they found is correct. Do you think this massive amount of information in one place that is easy to access is better overall? or worse? Grazian also attempts to point out some of the negative parts of the internet which is respectable but the arguments he uses are from people who already had problems to begin with. If someone is truly addicted to gambling they will gamble, whether its online or at a casino its the nature of the person, not the technology that enabled it. Also the girl who committed suicide had issues with depression before the incident on MySpace. Do you think that these people really would have been better off without the internet? or do you think these events were bound to happen sooner or later and they just happened to occur online?
Roman - Mix it Up Ch. 10
Chapter 10 of Grazian's book is devoted entirely to the digital age (the internet). He presents the good and the bad that's come from the advent of online life. The good is obvious to see. We now have entertainment and knowledge at our fingertips, making our fun and our learning more efficient. It's harder to see what can go wrong, but certainly the internet can dumb us down quite a bit if we're not careful. With so much information out there, it's hard to concentrate on any one thing for very long.
Interestingly, Grazian makes use of many extreme cases to illustrate the harm of the web. These examples include the college class president at Lehigh that gambled away 7500 dollars to online poker then robbed a bank as well as the girl on Myspace who committed suicide because of bullying. Are these just isolated events or are they something we're all sort of subjected to? I think the extreme cases are isolated events having to deal more with the sanity of the people involved than the internet itself. The internet is truly harmful in sneakier ways. Having so much information rush over us at once results in conflicting and often untrue information that can be harmful in the long term.
So, for discussion... Do you think the internet gets blamed for things that are really our own personal faults? For instance, with the gambling college student. Was he a victim of the internet or did he just abuse his self control? Do we need to keep a closer eye on the web or should we trust it?
-Roman
Interestingly, Grazian makes use of many extreme cases to illustrate the harm of the web. These examples include the college class president at Lehigh that gambled away 7500 dollars to online poker then robbed a bank as well as the girl on Myspace who committed suicide because of bullying. Are these just isolated events or are they something we're all sort of subjected to? I think the extreme cases are isolated events having to deal more with the sanity of the people involved than the internet itself. The internet is truly harmful in sneakier ways. Having so much information rush over us at once results in conflicting and often untrue information that can be harmful in the long term.
So, for discussion... Do you think the internet gets blamed for things that are really our own personal faults? For instance, with the gambling college student. Was he a victim of the internet or did he just abuse his self control? Do we need to keep a closer eye on the web or should we trust it?
-Roman
June 14th, 2010: Mix It Up (Ch. 10)
1. Summary:
Chapter 10 of Mix It Up focused on the growing of communication and new abilities with the new advances in technology and how it has affected industries that have existed for many years. Author Grazian starts off by discussing the mass use of spam and cons that the ideas of such can be traced back to the 16th century. The main difference compared to past cons and a current example – like the Nigerian email scam is that the mass use of email (and the difficulty in tracing its roots) allows such cons to send out the scam to thousands of people for little to no cost. Grazian also discusses how new computer and video games like World of Warcraft encourage and build users’ techniques of making decisions in a few seconds and dealing with the consequences and learning from such decisions. Grazian also talks about the disappearance and new competitiveness that many newspaper companies have experienced in more recent time since news is available online for free – although it may not be from the most reliable sources. Almost any industry, company, or individual can be negatively affected by the mass use of internet (like some “bad” professors on Ratemyprofessor.com) if someone chooses to post negative comments about their business.
2. What I learned/found interesting:
I found his examples interesting of how video and computer games better players’ decision making skills – to the point that they may be better decision makers than some Fortune 500 company owners. It seems that there have been many reports that say that such gaming is bad for concentration and causes anti-social habits in people – which are very different than what Grazian argues. I am not claiming one is right or better than the other – I just find this interesting.
3. Discussion Point:
Do you think it is now or will ever be considered acceptable to discuss skill sets learned from online/video gaming in an interview for a job? How would the argument of skills learned from such online games be compared to the skills learned from playing organized sports? If such two subjects were mentioned in an interview today, would the interviewer (person from the company asking the questions) receive and respond to both skill sets the same? Why or why not?
Chapter 10 of Mix It Up focused on the growing of communication and new abilities with the new advances in technology and how it has affected industries that have existed for many years. Author Grazian starts off by discussing the mass use of spam and cons that the ideas of such can be traced back to the 16th century. The main difference compared to past cons and a current example – like the Nigerian email scam is that the mass use of email (and the difficulty in tracing its roots) allows such cons to send out the scam to thousands of people for little to no cost. Grazian also discusses how new computer and video games like World of Warcraft encourage and build users’ techniques of making decisions in a few seconds and dealing with the consequences and learning from such decisions. Grazian also talks about the disappearance and new competitiveness that many newspaper companies have experienced in more recent time since news is available online for free – although it may not be from the most reliable sources. Almost any industry, company, or individual can be negatively affected by the mass use of internet (like some “bad” professors on Ratemyprofessor.com) if someone chooses to post negative comments about their business.
2. What I learned/found interesting:
I found his examples interesting of how video and computer games better players’ decision making skills – to the point that they may be better decision makers than some Fortune 500 company owners. It seems that there have been many reports that say that such gaming is bad for concentration and causes anti-social habits in people – which are very different than what Grazian argues. I am not claiming one is right or better than the other – I just find this interesting.
3. Discussion Point:
Do you think it is now or will ever be considered acceptable to discuss skill sets learned from online/video gaming in an interview for a job? How would the argument of skills learned from such online games be compared to the skills learned from playing organized sports? If such two subjects were mentioned in an interview today, would the interviewer (person from the company asking the questions) receive and respond to both skill sets the same? Why or why not?
Friday, June 11, 2010
Chapter 10 of Mix it Up
In this last chapter of the book, Grazian covers a lot of ways in which technology affects our lives on a day to day basis. He opens the chapter by using the example of the Nigerian e-mail scam, showing the reader that just by opening your e-mail and taking it seriously, you can essentially lose a good bit of money if not all of it. This was also done since the 16th century (and probably longer) in a scam regarding a Spanish Prisoner unjustly put in captivity. The quick pace of the internet has changed the way we absorb what we are reading. Research suggests that due to the flashy advertisements online and scanning headlines, nowadays we no longer read as thoroughly as we used to and do not concentrate deeply on the material. Online gambling has left people broke, and because of portable technology, people no longer interact as much as they used to. Second Life and World of Warcraft have given people the opportunity to live life as another person that they are able to design, avatars, and anything done in normal everyday life can now be done in Second Life as well, including getting a blow job. Online news, although it allows people to get their news rather quickly and conveniently, many newspapers are now going out of business.
What I appreciated most about this chapter and Grazian's views was that he gives both the positive and negative. For example, he talks about what the skills gained through playing video games. I had always thought of video games as a mindless activity, but according to Grazian, it helps with "development of cognitive skills" and decision making (198). He also includes that the organization skills gained through gaming may be utilized in the professional world as well. Even online gambling like poker, although the author talks about the down side of people's, especially college student's obsession with the game, he also says the those who play these online games master a sort of yogic focus.
My question is then purely subjective. Do you think the good of playing video games outweigh the bad? In America do we just have an exceptionally bad view of video games which makes us consistently look at them negatively and consider them just a waste of time? Is gaming actually an activity that can be just as productive as other recreational activities only in a different way? I would be very interested to hear whatever you have to say about this.
A. Gorno
What I appreciated most about this chapter and Grazian's views was that he gives both the positive and negative. For example, he talks about what the skills gained through playing video games. I had always thought of video games as a mindless activity, but according to Grazian, it helps with "development of cognitive skills" and decision making (198). He also includes that the organization skills gained through gaming may be utilized in the professional world as well. Even online gambling like poker, although the author talks about the down side of people's, especially college student's obsession with the game, he also says the those who play these online games master a sort of yogic focus.
My question is then purely subjective. Do you think the good of playing video games outweigh the bad? In America do we just have an exceptionally bad view of video games which makes us consistently look at them negatively and consider them just a waste of time? Is gaming actually an activity that can be just as productive as other recreational activities only in a different way? I would be very interested to hear whatever you have to say about this.
A. Gorno
Mix it Up- Chapter 10
"Strange Days," examines the position digital technology plays in everyday society- particularly as a medium for social interactions and interpersonal communication. In one section, Grazian discusses the various suggestions that digital technology expands and heightens learning skills. Video games, for example, can hone collateral learning, developing vital organizational and decision making skills ideal for positions of leadership (ie,business). Yet Grazian points out the downside to "online surfing" which reduces the ability to concentrate upon and analyze texts in a thoughtful and critical manner. This correlates to the current capsule nature of magazines, newspapers, and commercials. Digital technologies also create the zone; online gambling is an example of this and boundaries are blurred to the point where reality no longer exists and potential for addiction increases. The zone simply exacerbates the isolation, diminishes face-to-face interactions, and introduces and increases health problems. Grazian explores the porous wall between cyber and natural reality (ie, digital sweatshops and SL) and the impact the cyber world has on our everyday lives, particularly our identities and reputations. Though the future of online media is uncertain, Grazian suggests that the digital age is defined by the emergence of three phenomena: the convergence of content across various media mediums and industries; active participation of audiences in shaping their media experiences; and collective intelligence which challenges and produces new media forms. The chapter culminates with the assertion that popular culture in this digital age requires unfettered discourse in order to thrive.
I thought the Second Life portion of chapter ten was interesting. Seriously, trading actual money for cyber money to buy cyber things? I am shocked that online gamers spend over a billion a year on virtual assets!
Grazian quotes Klein's argument that "that culture is something that happens to you. You buy it at the Virgin Megastore or Toys 'R' Us and rent it at Blockbuster Video. It is not something in which you participate, or to which you have the right to respond. " Do you think Klein is correct?
-Lolia
I thought the Second Life portion of chapter ten was interesting. Seriously, trading actual money for cyber money to buy cyber things? I am shocked that online gamers spend over a billion a year on virtual assets!
Grazian quotes Klein's argument that "that culture is something that happens to you. You buy it at the Virgin Megastore or Toys 'R' Us and rent it at Blockbuster Video. It is not something in which you participate, or to which you have the right to respond. " Do you think Klein is correct?
-Lolia
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
Ch 1-4 Mix It Up-Rachel
The book starts off discussing popular culture and what that exactly means. popular culture must be well liked by the public. Examples of pop culture well liked by the public are movies. recent popular movies are The Dark Knight, Iron Man, Prince Caspian, and the Indiana Jones movies starring Harrison Ford. Also, some actors and actresses are famous and well liked regardless of their talents and acting ability.Culture is another fascinating topic that is discussed and sociologists of culture are interested in all different types of rituals and social activities. These types of activities are dating, retail shopping, sports participation, cigarette smoking, casino gambling, and many others. When studying culture, it is important to study the cultural objects of society. These are social expressions of meaning that have been transformed into a tangible item. An example of a cultural object id Homer's Iliad. Media and popular culture can be defined by combined efforts that produce movies, musical compositions, novels, advertising, and many others.
The functionalist approach is discussed in Chapter 2, which is associated with the French sociologist Emilie Durkheim. Durkheim was interested in the role that religion played within society. I found it very interesting that Durkheim studied very early religions. Early religions that Durkheim studied were the ancient spiritual faiths of the Native Americans as well as Aboriginal Australians. Religion in these societies structured their everyday living like their way of governing themselves and, work schedules, and the way they viewed the natural world. Durkheim also looked into the sacred and the profane aspects of religion.
Karl Marx is another prominent person to mention. Marx was one of the first thinkers to notice the problems with pop culture in a capitalistic society. In a piece of writing called The German Ideology, Mark makes an important argument. He argues that dominant ideologies in a society are in place to benefit the wealthier ruling classes and so that they can also maintain their power. Italian thinker Antonio Gramsci, who was imprisoned during Mussolini's reign of power drew on Niccolo Machiavelli's sixteenth century political work called The Prince to understand the ways in which the media can control a society through the power of persuasion.
There are so many recognizable brands in society- Kellogg's, Nike, Microsoft, Apple, and Nintendo are just a few that the book mentions. Coca-Cola was ranked number one under criteria such as consumer loyalty, customer demand, and predictions of future revenues. Chapter four explores another inportant theorectical approach in Sociology, the Interactionist Approach. This focuses on smaller-scale interactions between people and groups of people. Erving Goffman explains personhood as a mixture of presentations of self that we that we express when participating in social activities. We act differently when around different types of people such as a close group of friends, teachers, police officers, and our parents. How else can we explain the differrent eays we act around different groups of people?
The functionalist approach is discussed in Chapter 2, which is associated with the French sociologist Emilie Durkheim. Durkheim was interested in the role that religion played within society. I found it very interesting that Durkheim studied very early religions. Early religions that Durkheim studied were the ancient spiritual faiths of the Native Americans as well as Aboriginal Australians. Religion in these societies structured their everyday living like their way of governing themselves and, work schedules, and the way they viewed the natural world. Durkheim also looked into the sacred and the profane aspects of religion.
Karl Marx is another prominent person to mention. Marx was one of the first thinkers to notice the problems with pop culture in a capitalistic society. In a piece of writing called The German Ideology, Mark makes an important argument. He argues that dominant ideologies in a society are in place to benefit the wealthier ruling classes and so that they can also maintain their power. Italian thinker Antonio Gramsci, who was imprisoned during Mussolini's reign of power drew on Niccolo Machiavelli's sixteenth century political work called The Prince to understand the ways in which the media can control a society through the power of persuasion.
There are so many recognizable brands in society- Kellogg's, Nike, Microsoft, Apple, and Nintendo are just a few that the book mentions. Coca-Cola was ranked number one under criteria such as consumer loyalty, customer demand, and predictions of future revenues. Chapter four explores another inportant theorectical approach in Sociology, the Interactionist Approach. This focuses on smaller-scale interactions between people and groups of people. Erving Goffman explains personhood as a mixture of presentations of self that we that we express when participating in social activities. We act differently when around different types of people such as a close group of friends, teachers, police officers, and our parents. How else can we explain the differrent eays we act around different groups of people?
MIU, Chapters 1-4
In the first chapter, the author talks about the pop culture and pop music, and how it transformed over time. He discusses the pop music and culture then and now, as well as the people of the pop culture. Next, Grazian discusses the functional side of pop culture. According to the author, there can be good and bad sides of pop culture. On one hand, pop culture can serve to connect people. On the other, it can also divide them. Grazien goes into the negative sides of pop culture further in the third chapter. As such, he explains the view that the pop culture is controlled by those, who profit from it. Thus, it is not the everyday people who make the pop culture, but those who control the industry. The fourth chapter takes on a different approach. Here, the view is that it is, in fact, the people that determine the popular trends and culture through interaction.
It was interesting to see the two opposing theories in chapters 3 and 4. Never having thought of pop culture as being "fed" to us, chapter 3 gave me some food for thought. Yet, things such as music need to be liked, in order to thrive in the business. Although, there may be something i don't know. Do you believe that somebody can really dictate what you will like or not?
It was interesting to see the two opposing theories in chapters 3 and 4. Never having thought of pop culture as being "fed" to us, chapter 3 gave me some food for thought. Yet, things such as music need to be liked, in order to thrive in the business. Although, there may be something i don't know. Do you believe that somebody can really dictate what you will like or not?
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Mix it Up (Chapters 1 - 4)
In the beginning we see how many “remakes” there are of songs and movies. How popular culture comes about, how it makes people like Paris Hilton famous when she never really did anything of interest to warrant such fame. How the rituals and activities that people take part in keep and hold people together. We see how there is some organized rebellion against popular culture and also that there is a dark side to it. How advertising effects and molds popular culture and how few companies control most of the media outlets (music, news and books.) How sometimes it can create social inequalities such as positioning employees who are less attractive or less well dressed to positions where they can’t be seen. We see the influences that social networking has on popular culture, i.e. Facebook, MySpace.
I found it strange that a sociological society took up the position that we should rename the sports teams that are name after Indians. That American Indians like westerns and identify more with the cowboys. It is interesting that there are very few companies that control most of the media, books and music. I was surprised to see that “Office Space” was a box office flop, that movie is awesome.
I could see the football team the Washington Redskins being considered a racial slur on American Indians but I think that to say that you can’t give any team an Indian name is silly, what are your thoughts?
Lou Coban
I found it strange that a sociological society took up the position that we should rename the sports teams that are name after Indians. That American Indians like westerns and identify more with the cowboys. It is interesting that there are very few companies that control most of the media, books and music. I was surprised to see that “Office Space” was a box office flop, that movie is awesome.
I could see the football team the Washington Redskins being considered a racial slur on American Indians but I think that to say that you can’t give any team an Indian name is silly, what are your thoughts?
Lou Coban
Patrick Garner-Mix it Up Chapters 1-4
In "Mix it Up" by David Grazian he describes pop culture in terms of the world today or recent events. He describes exactly what pop culture means. Chapter 1 deals with music evolving throughout history. Describes how different types became popular and faded out. The author describes the different types and the people who follow these types of pop culture. Chapter 2 focuses on the functionalist prospective,which is one of the three approaches to describe pop culture. The author takes a stand point that we talk about and get hooked on people in the media to be able to talk about things in their lives instead of our own. Chapter 3 deals with the critical approach. He discusses the power of culture industrys. For example, how people become obsessed with brand names. Also, how big name brands such as coca-cola take over and sell limitless varietys of other products such as Dasani, Crush, Sweppes, etc. This is what people know and they become obsessed with certain realms of large firms. Chapter four deals with the interaction approach. This approach is how people think from what other people say. For example, someone might tell you that coca cola products are no good so you drink pepsi products. Really you do not know this but you listen to the gossip.
I found interesting chapter 3 and the power of culture industrys such as Disney. I did my industrial engineering intership at disney last spring and I know how obsessed people get with it. Because something is Disney owns people who are obsessed with it love that too. Anything with the Disney name on it will usually sale. We think it is crazy in the United States, the Disney name is even more popular around the world. I mainly found it interesting just looking at it through the critical approach.
Do you think people really follow celebrity's through the media to help make their own lives feel better? From my own perspective I do not follow celebrity gossip because half of it is nonsense. I am just wondering if anyone can agree that it is an outlet for people to talk about dumb things the celebritys do to free themselves from their private lifestyles.
I found interesting chapter 3 and the power of culture industrys such as Disney. I did my industrial engineering intership at disney last spring and I know how obsessed people get with it. Because something is Disney owns people who are obsessed with it love that too. Anything with the Disney name on it will usually sale. We think it is crazy in the United States, the Disney name is even more popular around the world. I mainly found it interesting just looking at it through the critical approach.
Do you think people really follow celebrity's through the media to help make their own lives feel better? From my own perspective I do not follow celebrity gossip because half of it is nonsense. I am just wondering if anyone can agree that it is an outlet for people to talk about dumb things the celebritys do to free themselves from their private lifestyles.
MIX IT UP; Chapters 1-4
In the text Mix it Up, Grazian first explores the definition of popular culture or "pop culture." He breaks it down into what is well known, liked, and dumbed down enough that they are understandable and relate-able to the masses. He also looks at the ritualistic exercises of society in the US, drawing connections to today's use of sports. Grazian claims that sports allow people to commune without distractions that otherwise obstruct communication. He also talks about celebrity gossip and things of this nature that are not particularly thought provoking but draw people together without any other facts that would otherwise hinder their convergence with others. Regarding these outlets, Grazian assimilates them to folklore and says, "...They give tangible form to otherwise abstract ethical dilemmas concerning the nature of human relations and social behavior" (33). He also touches upon the negative aspects of pop culture, for example, the common objectification of females of all ages, schools building facilities for sports and, hence, not emphasizing education as much as recreation, etc. Today's culture seems to be dominated by products and company names. There is manipulation of the basis of greed. Grazian basically notes that capitalism is sucking culture dry by taking away tradition and promoting, in the words of Marx, "inequality between labor and capital" (56). Lastly, in chapter four, he discusses how things are passed along not on the mass scale but in smaller communities like groups of friends, families, etc. There is a small scale to popular culture. Overall, from these four chapters, one may say that there is a hierarchy to pop culture.
What I found most interesting was Grazian's approach to analyzing sports. I had never looked at this convention in this way. It is true that they serve as a meeting point for a lot of different people who would, perhaps, otherwise be too caught up in other factors to talk to one another. Consider that sports really have no social-class standards. EVERYONE can be a Steelers fan in Pittsburgh, regardless of how much money they make a year. (And they are.)
My question is then, are there any social outlets like this that aren't so shallow? We have celebrity gossip, sports - I guess what also brings people together is tragedy and current events, especially when considering things as recent as September eleventh. But even this didn't last very long and ended somewhat poorly. What do you think?
A. Gorno
What I found most interesting was Grazian's approach to analyzing sports. I had never looked at this convention in this way. It is true that they serve as a meeting point for a lot of different people who would, perhaps, otherwise be too caught up in other factors to talk to one another. Consider that sports really have no social-class standards. EVERYONE can be a Steelers fan in Pittsburgh, regardless of how much money they make a year. (And they are.)
My question is then, are there any social outlets like this that aren't so shallow? We have celebrity gossip, sports - I guess what also brings people together is tragedy and current events, especially when considering things as recent as September eleventh. But even this didn't last very long and ended somewhat poorly. What do you think?
A. Gorno
Roman Extra Credit - Future of Democracy
I know I'm a bit late on this one as Jeremy already posted on it earlier, but it recently sort of popped into my head.
On the surface, the idea of direct democracy makes so much sense. The majority of people will be satisfied with the outcome of every decision. But then I realized a ton of problems would rise out of this.
First of all, if we're voting that frequently will we really put adequate research into each decision? I think we're more likely to just follow the crowd. This could lead to poor decision-making. Also, people in the minority will never be represented as they are now. Currently, the nation is largely composed of Democrats yet Republicans still have a huge say in what goes on. This system keeps both parties in check. If direct democracy were in place one of the parties could very easily fall into obscurity. The two party system we have now is much fairer than it may seem on the surface.
-Roman
On the surface, the idea of direct democracy makes so much sense. The majority of people will be satisfied with the outcome of every decision. But then I realized a ton of problems would rise out of this.
First of all, if we're voting that frequently will we really put adequate research into each decision? I think we're more likely to just follow the crowd. This could lead to poor decision-making. Also, people in the minority will never be represented as they are now. Currently, the nation is largely composed of Democrats yet Republicans still have a huge say in what goes on. This system keeps both parties in check. If direct democracy were in place one of the parties could very easily fall into obscurity. The two party system we have now is much fairer than it may seem on the surface.
-Roman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)