Monday, October 25, 2010

"I wish I was...I wish I had...I wish I looked like..."


Everything is comodified. I remember watching this when I was about ten years old. Now that I look back and think of the word globalization, we're exposed to it from such a young age. Here in this clip you see a group of girls who are freshly beginning to sell their new record album. The part that is not shown in the clip is the way in which their agent gets them to the top of the box office by putting subliminal messages into the music. That is what originally gets the teenagers in the movie obsessed with these three girls.

The funny thing is, the subliminal element added to the story is to create a villain and a climax to the movie. In real life there is no need for subliminal messages. People still go crazy for the new pop artist, like they did back in the day when "A Hard Day's Night" was produced.
Women still act all crazy when a singer they connect with comes on stage. You see teenagers line up to see concerts and movie theaters just to see their fantasies come alive in a pop artist or actor. People still buy t-shirts, cd's, sweaters, and posters.

The younger kids get, the easier it is to sell and globalize a popular comodity.

Who wouldn't want Hannah Montana as a true friend! I'd BUY it.

"The cultural homegenization theseis proposes that the globalization of consumer capitalism involves a loss of cultural diversity. It stresses the growth of 'sameness' and a presumed loss of cultural autonomy" (Barker 159). How are kids supposed to form their own identities if they are busy mimicking their pop idols? With capitalism playing a huge role in governing our lives, pretty soon we will all resemble robots, creating franchises of HUMANS!





Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. London: Sage Publications, 2008.Print.







Monday, October 18, 2010

Is Sexuality Still Censored today?


The idea of sex is always changing. We can say there is a radical as well as conservative view of sex. We, as a society, define what we deem as radical or conservative. There is a growing discourse of sexuality since the 18th century. This discourse maintains order. Before, when sex was not transformed into a discourse, Michel Foucault would say there was the "forbidding of certain words" (1504). People were afraid to talk about sex or anything related to intimacy. The discourse now defines people by disciplining us. Foucault believes that there should no longer be a top/down relationship between people. Higher institutions should not govern sex. It should be a horizontal relationship within all people. This horizontal relationship allows each individual to regulate themselves and others. We monitor each-other and we internalize what's right and wrong.

So is sexuality censored today? The discourse of sex is not censored to PUBLIC, but each individual filters sex differently.

Depending on where you go and who you talk to their answers might differ. Answers differ from household to household, person to person, city to city, country to country, town to town, mother to daughter. Because we are subjects of an ever-changing society, with limitless technology and means of communication, everyone is susceptible to hearing the new hetero- normative variations of sex as well as the non-normative variations. Eventually those who did not belong in the norm find an acceptance over time and a new "category" of people who do not belong to the norm are created. I think it's a process of addition and substitution. There are always new variables being added, multiplied, subtracted and divided.

Foucault, Michel. The Norton ANthology of Theory and Criticism. 2nd ed. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York, NY, 2010. 1502-1521. Print.


Thursday, October 14, 2010

Fear, Consumption, Exploitation

Tara Ekmekci

Prof. Wexler

English 313

13 October 2010

Fear, Consumption, Exploitation

Language is the only way to communicate with one’s self and with other selfs. Without language there would be no understanding of the self. The postmodern self is a fragmented self. The person one thinks they are is an assembly of so many small fragments, pieced together to create a whole. Not only is the self created, it is "rearrang[ed], transform[ed] and correct[ed]" (Bordo 1099). With all the technology available to us today, god— as the creator— has been replaced by surgeons. This postmodern rhetoric of choice and technology has allowed people (mostly women) to constantly find a reason to be dissatisfied with their bodies. This dissatisfaction leads to the postmodern plastic discourse. In this discourse, "all sense of history and all ability (or inclination) to sustain cultural criticism, to make the distinctions and discriminations which would permit such criticism, have disappeared" (Bordo 1104). This means that because the post-modern self is relative, no one passes judgment anymore. There is this "you do what you want and I'll do what I want" attitude in the air. This discourse no longer allows there to be an underlying truth.

Because of this, there is a postmodern angst developing. These non-judgmental people seem respectful towards the actions, comments and opinions of individual others, but under that veil there are true bottled up opinions. "Television is of course, the great teacher here, our prime modeler of plastic pluralism" (Bordo 1104). Instead of judging each other or setting limits for the post-modern self, society finds the television to be a better role model. As long as someone on TV says it looks beautiful, or it'll make everything look and feel okay, then society feels that it is worthy of being mimicked. Technology has taken away the role of human contact and communication. The post-modern self has created a dialogic relationship with the Television, rather than with humans. With this said, how are relationships between male and female supposed to arise in this world lacking true communication? Is love based off traditional concepts anymore? Is there a decline in marriage? Has it become yet another institution governing the lives of many? In the 21st century, where identity is constantly produced and reproduced, this fragmented idea of love and relationships has been constructed by the core of postmodern culture, television

In Elizabeth Gilbert’s, Eat Prey Love, Elizabeth is on a radical quest to find her true self. Elizabeth is unsatisfied with cultural norms. She is tired of her traditional path to marriage and creating a family. Elizabeth has come to a point in her life where a home, car, job and an outgrown soul-mate no longer suffice. The agony of living in this "in-between", where she's neither happy or sad is far more painful than the thought of breaking both her and her husband's heart. Elizabeth finalizes the divorce and soon after is on a journey to find her true identity.

This film is comprised of bits and pieces of the radical, sex and romantic comedy. This is the story of "girl divorces husband, girl finds a younger man, girl is not satisfied with younger man, girl tries to find herself, girl meets man again, girl and man fall in love." The reason why this film does not follow the typical arc of the romantic comedy, because "a romantic comedy is a film which has as its central narrative motor a quest for love, which portrays this quest in a light hearted way and almost always to a successful conclusion." This story is not about the quest for love. It’s about the quest for spiritual love, faith, courage and happiness. It does not start out with a girl meeting a boy element, it begins with a divorce.

Eat Pray love is a twisted version of a traditional romantic comedy, but there are so many sub-genres weaved into it that interrupt the linear play of the usual romantic comedy arc. After Elizabeth’s divorce, she finds a rebound partner. She is satisfied with his youth and free spirit, as well as their sexual connection. Although she abolishes the idea of marriage and the opposing idea of having no strings attached, Elizabeth is still unhappy. She realizes that finding another man is not going to be the solution to the void she is constantly experiencing. She still has no idea of what it is that will fulfill her true self.

Once Elizabeth realizes her relationship with the younger man needs to end, she decides to take a year long trip to Italy, India and Bali. The film and Elizabeth are on this profound non-conservative journey of finding one’s true self through exploration. Now is it a postmodern characteristic for a woman to leave a traditional marriage in order to find her self? In today’s society, it is a rightful choice to be able to divorce and change one’s life. Even though there are people who disagree with one’s choice of divorce and taking off to different countries, no one is really able to force their opinion on each other. Elizabeth is free to make her own decisions without worrying about their repercussions. She is unhappy and she has one life to live right? There isn’t one truth when it comes to the happiness of an individual. Two people could have different conceptions on the idea of happiness and marriage. There are multiple truths available in a postmodern world. The sky is the limit and Elizabeth can build her identity whenever she pleases. What are the implications of this radial romantic film on its viewers?

Work Cited

Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. London: Sage Publications, 2008.Print.

Bordo, Susan. "'Material Girl': The Effacements of Postmodern Culture."Print.

McDonald, Tamar Jeffers. Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre. London: Wallflower Press, 2007. Print.

Monday, October 4, 2010

Married Women, I am Not Married, but Listen!

There's something called the institution of marriage. Now like I stated in my previous blog, men and women join in holy matrimony (when the time is "right") and begin a new period of their lives together. Two people begin by sharing their hearts, and continue their entire lives sharing their thoughts, their bodies, children, a home, and etc. Not all people believe in this institution, just like not all people believe in the institution of religion, politics or school. Everyone is entitled to their own principles, but I'm personally fueling this essay off the idea that the majority of people get married and later form a family by producing children.

Now whether you start having sex before or after marriage is irrelevant. The relevancy is found in the amount of years you have sex with your partner. (Keep in mind I am playing devil's advocate.) Your first ten years both of you are blooming. New flowers are blossoming, the soil you're running on is still fertile and fresh. There are no arid spaces. As the kids begin to grow older, parenthood enters a tedious routine that might (or might not) begin interfering with yours and your husband's sex life. (Again I am discussing a worst case scenario.) What to do?

Before I try and act like the marriage therapist that I'm not, let me further discuss the role of the male in this midlife crisis. Us women- believing we are the center of our husband's lives-probably don't understand why and how our husbands can undergo such a crisis. The truth is, men begin to realize that they have lost their masculinity. They have become family man. They look around and see butterflies flying over couples with brawny boyfriends flirting with their slender girlfriends. The husband looks down and realizes he is holding his sons hand and a McDonald Happy Meal. He thinks, "Where did life take me? How fast did my good years pass? What happened to my six pack?" They start thinking and over analyzing like women and enter their mid life crisis. What each man experiments with/whom in their crisis might be different. Some men might not even enter this stage, but the point of the stage is to prove to themselves that they are still capable of doing everything they did when they were younger. This trailer is what they try to prove to themselves they can still obtain.


Women, we have so many things to worry about that we might not even realize our husbands are in such a stage. I am not married, nor do I have children, but the best twenty one year old advice I can give you is to first look inward. Have you neglected your husband? Have you been a btich? Is there a reason things have changed and have you discussed concerns (if any) with your partner? There is no need to do things or feel things behind each-other's backs. An open relationship is a healthy one. There is no need to fear the other's response, because chances are you two are not the only ones who feel this way. You should remember the laughs, smiles, and reason why you got married in the first place and find the strength to sort things out. True love conquers all!