The Holder of the World

Reading Holder of The World has actually been very interesting to me. I was afraid of not getting that in to it because of its relation to Scarlet Letter… oops. But I think I like it most because I’m able to determine when Mukherjee is using theory or ideas that we’ve been talking about all semester. I’ve recognized all sorts of things from the importance of an author (T.S. Eliot), demystification, deconstruction, metonymy etc. but what I have found most interesting is the idea of space and how it reacts with both culture and time.

Mukherjee suggests that something cannot be fully understood without addressing both time and space. The context or history of a country must be closely analyzed before you can understand the space or problem. This discussion of history and context is similar to Klein’s discussion, as well as the situation in Bangladesh which we saw through the video shown in class.

This leads to our discussion in class today of Post-Modern Lit. Post modern literature is when the author shows for example that two people may both be looking at a similar thing or truth, but they see it differently. Mukherjee’s use of space, time and multiple characters allows us to see how this can happen, and how influential space can be on ones perception of truth.

I find this an important thing to know and understand because it allows one to become more tolerant and understanding. Being able to see things and issues from a variety of perspectives is a very powerful character trait which theory and various novels, such as this, allow you to see the importance of.

communities as a tactic

In conclusion both Juffer and Klein offer possible solutions to the issue of branding and the issues that single mothers are faced with. I feel as though the strongest argument and possible solution that they both offer is the importance of community and social support networks. The agency of communities can be seen through various organizations such as support networks, worker unions and even the CSB/SJU communities show the power of community.

My four years spent here have given me a great appreciation for the power of communities and networks. It is clearly one of the selling points of the school, and even though at times it can seem as though there is too much community, or too small of a community—I do feel as though it is a benefit.

Within the overall community of CSB/SJU there are individualized specific groups such as college dems, and college republicans as well as prism etc. These alliances give these people an outlet for support. This is what both Juffer and Klein suggest as possible solutions. If we are able to create a community in which we and others feel comfortable with our/others personal situations—where we don’t feel alienated for what we are, we can actually live a free life, and our ‘positive’ space can begin to impact others space who may be struggling.

It is hard to understand what we can do personally to make a difference in all the issues and problems we have seen and discussed in class. But I feel as though this tactic of creating networks such as these examples, the strategy of reversing these negative cycles and situations can succeed.

Space

The video we watched on Monday did a great job of showing how large the issue is that the people of Bangladesh are facing. I’ve learned about this before in other classes and have heard how poor their working conditions are and how they struggle to survive on their wages, let alone keep their families healthy, but I think that it is always a good thing to be reminded of just how unjustly so many people are treated.

The question always remains what can be done to reverse this trend. It’s a difficult question, but I liked that the film mentioned that the people working in these shops are not mad at the consumers, they are mad at the companies. The workers do not want the U.S. companies to leave, but they want and need their basic human rights to be respected. It’s impossible to imagine what it must be like to be denied the basic human rights and I think many times that is taken for granted here. The labor unions and labor laws that have been established in this country ensure us that we will be able to survive on the minimum wage, even if it is difficult at times.

The majority of workers in these shops/factories are women. This addresses the issue of gender roles and stereotypes. Situations such as this perpetuate the negative identities of both the males and females of this culture. The male supervisors abuse, harass and punish the female workers for not working fast or hard enough. This dominant and abusive stereotype of males will never be changed if these inhumane situation and treatment continues. The stereotype of women being submissive and vulnerable is also perpetuated by this situation. I found it most interesting that you must challenge yourself to look at the whole context of a culture to understand why there are certain stereotypes and gender roles. Everything is influenced by something else and it takes understanding things such as the economic situation and issues of a culture to truly ‘demistify’ and change or challenge a situation such as that in Bangladesh.

Octo Mom

My ‘single mom’ example for class today was the infamous octuplet mom. Now it’s hard to stay up to date with all the latest gossip (and frankly who cares enough to keep up with it…)—but as far as I know the octuplet mom Nadya Suleman, had six children before she chose to have more children using the method of implantation. This woman is struggling financially (she has no job and no money) and is living with her parents in a 2 bedroom apartment.

Because she chose and wanted to be a single mother Juffer would place her in the ‘single mother by choice’ category. Another point that Juffer raises is the importance of a social network or community. Single parents are often overwhelmed and do all the work of raising a child without the help of another parent. This support community that Juffer talks about is seen in a lot of television programs that feature a single parent (for example Full House). Although the octo mom is living with some family members the negative publicity she has been receiving may affect those relationships leaving her with very little support. Nadya even mentions in an interview that she doesn’t know how she is expected to care for her 14 children without any support from friends or family.

Obviously the example of the octuplet mother is an extreme case but it definitely gets a ‘thumbs down’ review. The way in which the media is portraying her gives people a bad feeling about single mom’s with this many children. But knowing how warped things can get through the media maybe the octo mom should get a thumbs-up. In an interview on the Today show (posted below if interested) she claims to be committed to her children and claims that people are only going against her because she has chosen to take the unconventional route and chosen to be a single mother. Juffer states that a single mother must be committed to their children, that their lives are your life—but that you must also make time for yourself. The oct mom now has 14 children, no job, no money… how is she suppose to make time for herself? Especially since the little time she does have is probably spent trying to ‘recover’ from all the media and rebuild her image.

The Importance of Deconstruction

Derrida’s writing on “Structure, Sign and Play” addresses the idea that the center is never truly present—so we must learn to deconstruct language in order to reach the truth, or to understand the meaning. During deconstruction Derrida uses binary opposites, for example nature vs. culture. Combining Derrida’s idea of the necessity of deconstruction, with Lacan’s idea that the culture, education and upbringing that we have all experienced is inescapable brought me to the issue we are each faced with on a daily basis, the media.

Many of us rely on the media to present us with an un-biased point of view—because after all that is a requirement of journalism, to present unbiased and uninfluenced information to inform the publics. Lacan’s argument provides us with great evidence that shows that no one can ever be truly unaffected by their experiences and background—which leads to biases existing everywhere, being truly unavoidable. And I’m sure we are all aware that biases exist in the media, for example Fox vs. CNN International etc. These different perspectives provide us with very different information.

This is where Derrida’s ‘invention’ of deconstruction comes into play. If we simply accept the incomplete information we receive from the media at face value, we will be left uneducated citizens and unable to truly play our role in society. We must take the advice of Derrida and understand that there is something lacking. For example the J-Lo song we listened to in class emphasizing how real she is, she went too far and we knew something wasn’t right with her message, that something was missing and it took deconstructing her message to understand that no she isn’t that ‘real’.

Well, I believe the same goes for the media. This is especially relevant with examples such as the War in Iraq and how the media misinformed the public about weapons of mass destruction; or how the public wasn’t given truthful information about the situation at Abu Ghraib. Both of these theories have proven to relate and be relevant to our everyday lives, even though this is only one example, it is a very important example that affects everyone. So possible ways of deconstructing the incomplete information we are fed from the media, is by using multiple sources to verify information etc. Once the public accepts that these biases the media holds cannot be escaped, we will begin to find ourselves better informed citizens.

unkown knowns

The Statue of Liberty is often seen as a symbol that represents the ‘American Dream.’ It represents and symbolizes the freedom, acceptance and opportunity that is expected by many who flee to the United States. These are the words which are on the statue:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

I recently watch a movie called ‘La Americana.’ This documentary follows the life of a South American woman who crosses the U.S. border and lives and works in New York as an illegal immigrant for many years. She is forced to flee to America because she has a young daughter who was in an accident and thereafter became a paraplegic. The woman can’t make enough money in Bolivia to cover her daughter’s medical bills so she risks her life going to America in hopes of earning money and sending it back home to help her daughter.

This movie allows the viewer to see the story and perspective of an illegal immigrant. Seeing this woman tell her story, and understanding her needs, reminded me of the discussion we had in class about ‘known known’s’ etc. and ‘unknown known’s’ which are ideas or perspectives that we should know but for some reason or another we don’t. This particular example of the perspective of an illegal immigrant made me wonder if people are simply conveniently forgetting and ‘repressing’ these thoughts and ideas, or if they are simply unaware of the other side of the story.

Immigration is a very, very complex issue and I’m still trying to sort out and figure out my thoughts and ideas on the issue, but this film really was a great documentary with a powerful story that is often times overlooked by some. It also makes you question the words and symbolic meaning of the Statue of Liberty. We are all immigrants in some way—at least our ancestors were at some point. And the statue claims that America will openly receive the ‘tired, poor, huddled masses’ but do the actions of the United States reflect those words? This movie got me thinking about how it is important to sometimes question symbols, meaning and metaphors that are often times unconsciously consumed by some of society.

signs, symbols and meaning

Signs and symbols are truly everywhere, which is why I think I’m struggling with this blog more than the others--because we are so consumed in signs, meanings, metaphors etc. that it’s hard to pick a specific example. So I’ll do my best to make sense of the way in which meaning and symbols can be changed and why it happens.

The story of the silk stockings brought up the idea of status, and how Mrs. Sommers saw these silk stockings as a sign of social standing. For many consumers this is the case, buying a popular brand name symbolizes a kind of social standing and looking at what a person is wearing, or buying etc can sometimes even tell you a little bit about that person.

With the Oscars coming up I’ve been thinking about how they present themselves and the various symbols that exist in that context. The current economic situation is affecting the often sought after ‘glamorous’ life of the stars and I believe in a way they are forced to alter their image. When the economy wasn’t struggling--the more diamonds and the more money spent on clothing and parties, the better the stars image. Don’t get me wrong, this glamorous lifestyle is still idolized and still exists, but stars are also aware that with such tough times their fans might have mixed feelings about spending so much money on such trivial things.

Michelle Obama’s inauguration gown was another example of this idea. Her gown was designed by a young, not-well-known designer and became a symbol. By choosing that dress, and that designer it showed the country that you don’t need high-end designers to look great, and that she doesn’t put emphasis on material things.

Symbols, signs and meaning can truly be found everywhere. And discovering the meaning isn’t always easy but it’s interesting to look into various signs and determine why and how meanings are developed and under what conditions they can change, or be interpreted differently.

“So far no chemist has ever discovered exchange value either in a pearl or a diamond.”

Marx’s sarcastic comment truly continues to relate to the world in which we live in today. He fights the common ideology in today’s society about the value placed on material goods and why that value is given to certain products. I would like to comment of Marx’s idea and further look at the ideology of consumerism and our relationship with the media...

In one of my classes we learned that on average consumers are exposed to 3,000 advertisements each day, but we only notice 30. This fact truly opened my eyes to how un-avoidable the messages of the media and brands are. The persuasive nature of everything around me became overwhelming after learning how many messages are thrown at us on a daily basis. The moose logo plastered all over the boy’s shorts next to me would have been unconsciously consumed before that class. I never would have thought twice about the consequences that may result from simply wearing a logo, and all of the factors that go into making a simple t-shirt. People turn into walking billboards—paying to wear a logo and perpetuate the brand which in turn contributes to the success of the company. I had never before recognized how everything I saw was shaping both my common sense and my beliefs about nearly everything I perceived.

Even though this media class fundamentally changed my understanding of the relationship between the mass media and society, I’m not so foolish as to think I am completely immune from the allure of these messages. Being a more informed consumer helps me to see the hidden motives of the mass media, but I still find myself, from time to time, giving in and perpetuating this unhealthy relationship. I mean who doesn’t want a designer bag over a cheap knock-off? And I find it nearly impossible not to strive to fit the rigid ideal of beauty and social acceptance that the media presents. It’s clear to me how inescapable the persuasive messages are. And even a complete awareness of this troubling relationship between the mass media and society does not protect us from the power of the appeal.

So what does it take to resist the appeal and avoid giving in to and perpetuating the ideology presented by the media?

I recently finished Snow Falling on Cedars by David Guterson. This is a novel that addresses the issue of stereotyping and prejudice. The entire novel is focused around a trial of a Japanese-American man who has been accused of killing a white man. This novel does a powerful job of showing the strong prejudices that Kabua, the Japanese-American man encountered on his trial. Most of the jury was prejudice against him for being a Japanese American because the novel takes place after the bombing at Pearl Harbor—making some prejudice against the Japanese race.

The novel is filled with details and histories of many characters. Depending upon the background of the reader, and the context in which the novel is read I believe there are many different meanings that can be found within this text.

I read this novel for a class that is dealing with issues of stereotypes and prejudices. I found this to be a perfect example of how the way we read is constructed by the context in which we are reading—this idea which was introduced by in Theory Toolbox. I knew going into the novel that I should keep an eye out for the injustices that the character faced. I found myself analyzing and interpreting Kabuo’s actions right down to his body language, and the reactions of the jury members. The meaning behind the characters and the novel was socially constructed and influenced by the beliefs and discussion with my classmates. It now occurs to me that if I had not experienced this text within this context the meaning would have been constructed very differently. For example, if I had read this novel without the focus on stereotypes and prejudice--I may have read it as more of a love story...... (I haven't seen the movie yet, but even the movie trailer seems to sell it as a love story--so i attatched a link to the trailer if you're interested!?)

Post 1....

Roland Barthes essay Death of the Author really got me thinking in a new way about the relationship between literature and the author.  It has always been second nature (and often times required for past courses) for me to research and analyze the past of an author in order to truly understand the meaning behind a piece of work.  Barthes seems to think:  “Writing is that neutral, composite, oblique space where our subject slips away, the negative where all identity is lost, starting with the very identity of the body of writing.”  Really Barthes?  I just can’t seem to understand that an author would be so removed and so detached from his writing, in fact it would be disappointing for me if that were the case.  Understanding both the arguments of T.S. Elliott and Barthes has raised some questions for me about the relationship between the author and the work.

Maybe it’s the generation that I’ve grown up in—the constant curiosity about the lives and histories of people.  For example the reality television, E! News and countless magazines have forced me to care about the history and the happenings in others lives—and maybe this has encouraged my curiosity and desire to know about the author.  Even in the music world it seems like all the most popular hits are “inspired” by experiences a pop-artist has gone through, whether it is a breakup, drug rehab or jail time! 

I believe it is a fine line between disconnection and personal involvement in literature and other expressions of art.  Maybe the hip-hop artists of today are letting their emotions and experiences influence too much of their work, but in the literature world I feel that if the author was completely disconnected from the work there would be little passion.  Without the author, for me is seems as though the work would have less meaning and would be less sincere.