Week 05: Mediating

‘Just Like a Movie”? By Geoff King (2005) inspects the barriers between reality and fiction in regards to news and cinema, and the difficult task of establishing a middle-point between the two conflicting parties.

9/11 is given as an example for comparison of breaking news, therefore reality, against cinematic constructions, fiction. The observation ‘to have this imagined fantasy of destruction realized in actuality was potentially very unsettling for those who might have enjoyed the fictional version’ (page 49), points out the idea of everything being light and exciting until it happens to you, in this case, happens in reality.

The view of such events being ‘the just desserts of ‘sinful’ American hedonism and materialism’ established by Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell (page 49) is an idea that attracted my attention, as I found it extremely offensive. My personal view is that regardless of ‘sins’ or crimes being committed, NO ONE should have to wear a punishment such as 9/11 or equivalent.

I think this idea alone has volumes to say about different peoples views on karma and influences of such views as well as the eye-for-an-eye notion and examines the cross over between cinema conveying reality and the effect this has on reality in actuality.

Bibliography:


King, G., 2005, ‘”Just Like a Movie”?: 9/11 and Hollywood Spectacle’ in The Spectacle of the Real: from Hollywood to Reality TV and Beyond, ed. Geoff King, Intellect Books, Bristol, pp. 47-57.

Week 04: ‘Writing’

‘Writing’  Game, A. & Metcalfe, A., (1996) sheds light on writing and the array of mechanics and elements illuminated through it’s practice and administration.  It focuses on the process and journey of writing in detail and the use of writing for not just English and literal purposes, but creative processes in general, art and daily routine inclusive.

On page 98 of ‘Writing’ et al (1996) I found the mention of Cavalcanti, who wrote a sonnet in which pens and other writing tools addressed the reader to be quite interesting. The rhetorical question on this same page ‘are pens speaking any less metaphoric than writers walking simply because we imagine the hand holding the pen? Brought me back to an idea my year 12 English teacher proposed. He told us about a quote he had once read, the quote being  ‘If a lion could talk, we could not understand him.’ said by philosopher Ludwig Wittengenstein. He explained it to mean, even if we could understand what a lion was saying in plain English from another perspective we wouldn’t because the conversation a lion would have would refer to a lions way of living and seeing the world not a humans.

Alternatively to ‘pens speaking’ being less ‘metaphoric’ because pens are controlled by the hand, I found a correlation between the lions point of views appearing less valid simply because we couldn’t understand them and the pen speaking being a silly notion due to its inanimateness and human control.

I think these two examples point out and encourage writers to be more creative not just see and accept things for how and what they are in a literal sense but question why they are that way and how they can be changed or moulded into a more interesting and dynamic idea.

Reference:

Game,  A. & Metcalfe, A., ‘Writing’ in Passionate Sociology, Sage, London, (1996) pp 87-105

Week 03: 'Reading'

‘Screen narratives’ –‘analysing film and television’ informs the reader about the presence of narrative structures and styles present in media, in particular film, television shows and interactive digital media. The article informs the reader about how different structures are suited to different demographics which, in turn, impacts on the viewers interpretation of what they are watching. The technique of Structuralism which ‘attempts to disclose the deep structural architecture and patterns like binary opposition beneath the surface of the text’ ibid (page 162) is fluently examined and is a central feature of the article.

The discussion of digital game narratives on page (179) ibid, was a feature that I found great interest in, as compared to the other media structures, digital game players can, ‘become’ the central figure in the cinematic environment’ (page 179 ibid) and ‘become authors of their own multiple story lines’ (page 181) ibid. This suggests an element of control and structure perhaps not attained in reality by the player. An example I find relevant to this notion is the Virginia tech shootings and the many arguments in regards to video game subjectivity being a catalyst of the event.

Jack Thompson, an attorney for girls who were shot in a similar incident in Kentucky 1997, is a strong opponent of violent computer games as seen in this interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvMGuh3_3JE

He reveals his theory that the game taught Seung Hui-cho (the shooter) how to conduct the murders with such precision. He announces that the games ‘drills you and gives scenarios on how to kill people’ The most powerful statement I got from this interview was when Thompson stated ‘video games are imitating life and then you get a bleed over of life imitating the art that he was into. This was all a game’ (4:33-4:44) which poses an interesting notion in regards to the media controlling us opposed to us controlling it.

‘The audiences active construction of meaning’ (page 182) ibid, in regards to the media they are consuming is interesting when studying such a case. It’s amazing how different screen narratives and the way in which different people read into them, can have such an adverse effect. They abuse the power they are privileged to through a digital alias, reflecting a grim and tragic situation in real life.


References:
Screen narratives’ by Stadler, J. & McWilliam, K (2009)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvMGuh3_3JE uploaded by 'FRONZ' On April 19th 2007

Week 02: 'Looking'

‘Introduction to textual analysis’ is an article concerning itself with how the tools learnt in media studies can lead us to gain a better understanding of the world. It points out that there are many ways to see one entity and emphasizes that there is more to interpretation than simply ‘seeing’  (R. L. Gregory page 1, ‘Introduction to textual analysis) It encourages the reader to see that one must delve beyond the surface to gain a worthwhile perspective and there are many ways in which to do so.

As Lacey points out ‘Different societies have a different understanding of the world because they learn about it in different ways’ (ibid. Page 7) I personally experienced this when going on a school trip to China for 5 weeks and living in such an unusual and diverse place in my eyes due to my modelling by the Western society and 'norms'. 
A large majority of people riding on bicycles opposed to cars was one thing that stood out to me as well as the dirty and bleak exteriors of many buildings with an alternatively spotless and meticulously kept interior. Compared to Western society the Chinese don’t see as much value in keeping the outside of their houses clean and the point of importance to them is a well kept and clean interior with an emphasis on removing shoes once inside and wearing 'inside shoes' which are not worn outside the home. 
From the eyes of someone simply gazing upon such traditions it would be easy to feel puzzled and slightly perplexed, it’s only when one goes beyond this initial sense of just looking they can benefit and gain further insight.