Tuesday, November 30, 2010


I thought this image went well with both previous posts of the Othering of African Americans, and having black athletes pose as an image of a brand. Lebron Jame's can be seen in many photos have brands tied with his name. In this picture there is no brand but it is centralizing him as a person to just being that of an athlete and nothing more. The magazine is clearly showing off her dress, and as many know Vogue is not one for having pictures of star athletes in their sport apparel. I also found the wording of white supremacy in this article such as a dagger being slashed in our society. We are surrounded by advertising that directly Others those who are not white. I found this image to have a direct affect of Othering Lebron James who is a celebrity in our society for his amazing ability to play basketball in a non intentional way. “For it is the ever present reality of racist domination, of white supremacy, that renders problematic the desire of white people to have contact with the Other. Often it is this reality that is most masked when representations of contact between white and non-white, white and black, appear to mass culture” (371). After reading Hooks article this really resounded to the advertisements I had found. In most of the photos of white women that I found searching on Google there was a type of Othering done in their background, whether it’s of an African American person or having people in the background dressed up like animals or savages to further the forefront image of the white model. Even in the photos of African American women that I found in the search they were Othered by their attire or makeup that was placed on them for the photo shoot.

Bell Hook


In Bell Hook’s essay “Eating the Other: Desire and Resistance” there is the analysis of how whites desire a presence of Otherness. I'm not sure if I completely agree with the argument that white supremacy is dominant in advertising (“For it is the ever present reality of racist domination, of white supremacy, that renders problematic the desire of white people to have contact with the Other." (371)-- maybe it's just the wording of "white supremacy" that sounds so abhorrent-- though I do agree that whites dominate the advertising spectrum, I've never personally viewed another race in an ad and thought of it as white domination or a spectacle. Hook's analysis on how white people find comfort in the distance of an advertisement with the Other was interesting, but I still found it farfetched. Hook brought to light how potent and deep advertising runs in our culture and how we view Others through our cultural lens to interpret how an ad affects us (and society as a whole).

As an analysis of the posted picture.. this may not have a logo for a brand, but the female model, Gisele Bundchen, is one of the most popular models in the world. I wish I would have found this photo before I read Hook, and then looked at it after -- too bad things can't be unlearned so easily. But it's obviously supposed to be high fashion with some sort of twisted concept... The racial undertones are extremely evident, and the men in the picture are looked upon as Others more obviously than the simple presence of a black person in an ad for Target or H&M.

Though I don't totally agree with all of Hook's points, the view of Otherness is one that is kind of disappointing- I don't like to think that I get excited subconsciously when I see an ad with a different race because they are so different- it seems totally hypocritical to what we've learned about equality and whatnot. I also found it very daunting, because if what Hook says is factual and we think that way and we do commodify the Other, then it's just perpetuating steadily in the cultural ideology- not exactly what I want to be teaching my children.

Monday, November 29, 2010

nike-ads.jpg







































Nike adds with African American athletes representing their brand are far more exploited than ones where Whites are representing their brand. Clearly Hook sees what advertising is doing here: They are through representing Otherness making their adds stand out, making them more interesting more desirable. Especially the one where the woman is posing naked. It is not only desirable because she reveals her naked body but because she is Other. Hook argues that this companies take this into regard and choose to have African Americans representing their brand because supposedly there are more AFrican Americans that desire Nike and to the White person it is more 'eye-catching'.


AHC - GK

Pre Class Post 11/30

After reading Bell Hooks “Eating the Other: Desire and Resistance,” it made me think of how pervasive the image of the Other is in mass media on a daily basis. Hooks view on Othering and advertising was what caught my attention the most because I had never viewed advertising in displaying domination over the Other. Hooks says, “For it is the ever present reality of racist domination, of white supremacy, that renders problematic the desire of white people to have contact with the Other. Often it is this reality that is most masked when representations of contact between white and non-white, white and black, appear to mass culture” (371). The problematic aspect of Othering in advertisements is that it gives the illusion of an anti-racist sentiment because, “it offers the promise of recognition and reconciliation” (370). Hooks gives the example of the Bennetton advertisements because of the diverse images that they show.

This allows consumers to feel as though they are getting close to the notion of the Other but also keeps distance at the same time. Hooks says, “One desires “a bit of the Other” to enhance the blank landscape of whiteness” (372). The other represents the extreme different, the possibility of danger, and the break away from the traditional. The consumers take advantage of the Other to improve upon their own lives. Brining the other into their own life “will provide a greater, more intense pleasure than any that exists in the ordinary world of one’s familiar racial group” (369). This is able to occur because from a non-critical perspective it seems like people are merging culturally to make a more united world.

Pre class Post - bell hooks

In Bell Hook’s essay “Eating the Other: Desire and Resistance” he talks foremost about Otherness and how ‘we’, white people, desire it. It is something that is different from the norm and when we see Otherness, it excites us. “…there is pleasure to be found in the acknowledgment and enjoyment of racial difference. The commodification of Otherness has been so successful because it is offered as a new delight, more intense, more satisfying than normal ways of doing and feeling.” (Hooks 366) Instead of a white male having sex with a white female it is more exciting, more interesting, although more intense to have it with someone Other; with a Black or Asian female. According to Hook it is more desirable because it is not ‘normal’. “When race and ethnicity become commodified as resources for pleasure, the culture of specific groups, as well as the bodies of individuals, can be seen as constituting an alternative playground where members of dominating races, genders, sexual practices affirm their power-over in intimate relations with the Other.” (Hooks 367) Hook argues that we almost ‘shop’ for Otherness like we would ‘shop’ for anything else since race has been commodified in our society/ culture. I believe Hook is saying that a white male, being the dominant race, can ‘shop’ for an African American female. He further says that stepping into ‘difference’ for the white male is exciting and ‘will provide a greater, more intense pleasure than any that exist in the ordinary world of one’s familiar racial group’. (Hooks 369)

He believes that “it is within the commercial realm of advertising that the drama of Otherness finds expression.” (Hooks 370) Hook gives us an example of how Pepsi does its advertising: They use Black people over whites because market surveys say that black people buy more Pepsi than other soft drinks. I thought about Nike here. If we would look at all the Nike adds nowadays I believe there are much more adds with Black athletes than with White athletes simply because market surveys probably found more black people to wear Nike or like Nike.

Whether in sexual desire or desire of commodities Otherness plays an important role. Otherness makes ‘things’ stand out more so and are hence more desired and spark more interest.

AHC – GK

pre-post for 11/30

During the break I read the Cixous reading from “Sorties” as well as the Judith Butler’s excerpt from “Gender Trouble.” I was especially excited to dive into this material because the concept of gender and the way is perceived in society but is studied as a social construct is something I have learned about and explored in the past. While the readings greatly differ, in a way Butler and Cixous touch upon many of the same important aspects of gender that are prevalent in today’s society. Specifically, I was fascinated by a particular part of the Cixous reading that goes as follows. “In the past, when carried to a rather spectacular degree, it was called ‘possession.’ Being possessed is not desirable for a masculine Imaginary, which would interpret it as passivity- a dangerous feminine position…A woman, by her opening up, is open to being ‘possessed,’ which is to say, disposed of herself.” (160) I interpreted this is multiple ways however; I found it easiest to unpack in regards to the way we perceive one another in society. Based on the dominant narrative today, it is feminine to be possessed. Therefore, men who are not possessing a woman or taking control of all aspects of their life are considered “pussies” or “wimps” and even often called, “fags.” They are called these names because these names associate with the way the female gender characteristics are portrayed in society. As a female, based on the ideologies created within our society I should be dependent and controlled in some ways by a male figure. Whether it is a boyfriend or a father it is up to the male in my life to be dependent on. However, my reliance on a male figure beyond a healthy relationship with that person makes me possessed by them. This is looked down upon by society when men seem to be possessed by others because it does not fit the “macho” stereotype that men are supposed to portray. While this was very prevalent in the past and has gotten better over time, it is still a huge issue today that continues to belittle women across the world.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Pre post 11/21/10

Last week, we began our discussion on theorist Michel Foucault. “Everyone locked up in his cage, everyone at his window, answering to his name and showing himself when asked” (95). This quote explains Foucault’s idea of ‘punishment without violence.’ More specifically, in this quote he is referring to the Panopticon. In the Panopticon, there is a tower directly in the center of the prison. In the tower you are able to see everything and everyone, however, no one on the outside can see you. Although there could potentially be nobody in the tower, one is never able to know. This notion of surveillance is what keeps order in the prison. It is the potential punishment that one is meant to be scared of. Society has a way of branding and keeping track of our every move. In some ways, we are nothing more than a bar code. “Power should be visible and unverifiable” (98). Foucault discusses this notion of visibility. We are constantly being watched. The act of ‘profiling’ is a good example of this. In our society we are always being tested and judged because of our actions, appearances, etc. Today, profiling is used more than ever towards preventing terrorist attackers. Because of ideology, we tell ourselves that this act of profiling and screening is the right thing to do. As a result, everyone gets profiled. Foucault’s act of surveillance feeds into Zizek’s ‘culture of fear.’ Today we live in a world where we are constantly fearful. After the shock of 9/11, we were forced to realize that we are not invincible. By replaying videos of 9/11 and constantly talking about new encounters with terrorists on the news, media has instilled this continuous fear among society.

"On my honor, I have no given, nor witnessed, nor received any unauthorized assistance on this blog."

Post Class Response 11/21

This week in class as we discussed Derrida and Foucault I was surprised and relieved by the knowledge I gained. Although the reading was challenging at first as we unpacked in class it all began to make sense. I was only able to understand the readings by truly relating them to the other theorists from this semester. Especially felt able to relate and understand Althusser, Macherey, and Barthes more in addition to what Derrida and Foucault teach us and believe in. Last semester I took a listening class in the communications department which was actually a Holt class. For two in half hours a week I sat in with 25 other students and learned how to listen. I was confused and even questioned my sanity and my classmates’ as well as my teachers for even being a part of this class. What I did learn however, was to study and listen to what was not said. Similar to Derrida’s notion of erasure, the listening class really opened my eyes to be aware of the difference. Like Macherey’s “rupture” and Barthes’ “gap” Derrida’s idea of the “erasure” is very similar. It is important to study what is not there or what was once there and no longer exists. This allows a different perspective on things for us and the ability to capture elements of situations that we wouldn’t otherwise see or understand. Like my listening class taught me, while some people feel uncomfortable with silence, others find comfort. I learned that while many people call the silence “awkward” I find it closeness and comfortable to be able to sit in a car for five hours and not say one word. That to me exemplifies a truly special relationship, I mean think about it. Macherey, Barthes, and Derrida all emphasize the importance of this notion of what does not exist.

Derrida : Week Post

This week in Critical Media and Cultural Studies we discussed the main concepts of Derrida. Derrida is a postmodern theorist and is closely related to de Saussure. Derrida believed in the power of differences, much like de Saussure’s concept that in language there are only differences. Derrida believes that in a logo central world, we are left with only differences, logo meaning language. Derrida calls this concept difference. Derrida puts a lot of emphasis, meaning, and importance on the use and creation of words. What is said and not said create and support ideology. This relates to Barthes and Macherey’s concept of the gap and the rupture. What is most important is what is not said, that is what should be examined. This is similar to Derrida’s statement that ideology is most powerful when we are not aware of the trace. In other words, when something seems natural it is not questioned. If a culture fully accepts an ideology it is not spoken or thought about, but instead simply preformed unconsciously. This unconscious behavior allows the principles of ideology to remain unquestioned. This is extremely dangerous. An unconsciously excepted ideology is not challenged, but instead simply accepted. This relates to Horkhiemer and Adorno’s ideas of passivity. Adorno and Horkhiemer believe that our culture industry creates passivity in a society, allowing ideologies to be portrayed and accepted unconsciously. Adorno and Horkhiemer agree that this is a dangerous phenomenon. When things are under erasure or hidden the power of ideology is given to the few to control the many. Althusser addresses this idea when examining ISAs and RSAa. The bourgeoisie creates ideologies that benefit them, and suppresses the proletariat. This injustice is made possible by passive and unconscious acceptance of ideologies because they are created to seem natural. It has been mentioned before that as Critical Media and Cultural Studies majors it is our job to be active participants within our culture, and as Lyotard would say, fight against the ‘norm’.

Derrida and Foucault Post-Class

This week we discussed Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida. I think Derrida was very interesting, because he relates to many theorists we covered in the beginning of the semester. At first when I read his work I was confused, but after talking about him in class and learning how he relates to other theorists, he was a lot easier to understand. He talks about the ‘trace’, and how there is always a connection that can be made in language. He also explains how ideology is most powerful when we are not aware of the trace, which relates to Adorno and Horkheimer. He also discusses how his term ‘difference’ is saying there is nothing but differences and we are left with only differences, which relates to DeSaussure when he says, in language there are only differences. He also says, “The trace is not a presence but is rather the simulacra of a presence that dislocates, displaces and refers beyond itself”. I think this has to do with the trace eventually becoming distant from its original form. This quote could be connected to Baudrillard and Benjamin, because they both discuss how reproduction changes the original.

Foucault talks a lot about surveillance and the gaze. He states, “Our society is one not of spectacle, but of surveillance”. This relates to the gaze, because it is a form of surveillance. When you’re on surveillance, and also with the gaze, people have to behave in a certain way. This quote relates to Bourdieu, because of how we want to be under surveillance, because of our need to want to be on TV and watch reality TV. It interests us to watch a TV show that has people who are being closely watched, because we feel like everything is real and they are being themselves. It gives us a sense of ‘jouissance’ to be able to see everything going on. We talked in class about how Facebook is a perfect example of being under surveillance; we use it as entertainment and to communicate with friends, but in reality it is just a way for people to see what we are doing and to see various information about us. We know people look at our Facebook pages, but we don’t know who… which is actually kind of creepy if you think about it.

“On my honor I have not given, nor received, nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this work”

post class 11/21

On Thursday in class we discussed Michel Foucault’s essay and one of his main points was the notion of the panopticon. One of the examples that were showed in class was a picture of a prison scene and it showed a tower that every cell could see. A quote from the reading that explains this further is when he says “Inspection functions ceaselessly” (94). The idea that discipline can function without violence. Even though the people in the cells are being watched can work if there is someone is in the tower or not. This follows the idea of surveillance. We talked about many examples of this and one that the class came up with and talked about more was security at the airport. They are finding more and more ways to try and strengthen the security there.

Another quote that we talked about in class was “Our society is one not of spectacle, but of surveillance” (101). He is not saying that our society is not a spectacle but it is looked at through the idea of surveillance and not spectacle. We related this to Laura Mulvey’s “gaze” reading in that the gaze is related to the idea of surveillance.

On my honor I have not given, nor received nor witnessed any unauthorized assistiance on this blog

The Idea of Surveillance : Post-Class



The idea of always being watched is becoming quite common these days. Wherever you go, you hear of security cameras or various systems in place that you feel like someone is seeing everything you do. However, what is funny about this system and its implantation into our world is that it is not quite ‘everywhere.’ Of course it is in the airports and most retail venues in addition to a laundry list of other locations, but ‘everywhere’ is broad and I would inaccurate. Nevertheless, this follows in Foucault’s idea of surveillance. We have become so accustomed to being ‘watched’ that there is a very blurry line between the times we are or are not. It is easy to walk into a store and assume it has security cameras all throughout the location, but that does not mean they are actually there. On a different note, “everyone locked up in his cage, everyone at his window, answering to his name and showing himself when asked” writes Foucault, a statement I cannot help but agree with (95). Here is all this security that is making us safer, possibly hindering our privacy, but make us safer. We go into a situation where these precautions are in place and blindly abide to them. Whether it is a metal detector, a security camera, or the newly introduced scanners in airports, we go in and blindly abide to everything going on because in our minds we justify it as being the right thing to do. If we can assure ourselves that these precautions are for a greater cause, than we do not mind being passive, but there is a great narrative going on. What about privacy and rights? Are these being infringed upon? That is where I stand, asking those questions, wondering what to think first.

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Post Class

I thought it was really interesting how Tuesday’s class discussion on “Differance” tied in so well to our theorists at the beginning of the semester. Derrida relates to Macherey, Barthes, and DeSaussure, but he also brings in a new element when talking about what is left out of the text. He refers to the “gap” or the “rupture” as “erasure.” He says that it is important to understand what is under “erasure”, what is being left out, and we must be very critical of that. He also expands on DeSaussure with his notion of language being arbitrary. With language, we can never pin down an exact meaning for a word because there are so many associations that we make with language that differs from person to person. We are always trying to find differences in words and we are unable to get out of this process.

In Thursday’s class discussion on Foucault I thought the connection of surveillance to ideology was interesting because I had not thought of ideology in terms of Foucault’s ideas previously. One quote that stuck out to me in class was, “A real subjection is born mechanically from fictious relation.” We operate under a system of ideology that has been created for us. We go along with the system that has been constructed for us without resistance. In thinking about this after class I related this the most to the surveillance that takes place in school, and particularly high school. The surveillance that exists within school is what makes it possible to get order over that many kids. Without the ideology of surveillance set in place, the student to teacher ratio would not be enough to keep order. With the ideologies far fewer adults are able to keep control over hundreds of high school students.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Post Class- Foucault




I really enjoyed our class discussion on Michele Foucault and the idea of surveillance- it got me thinking about how much it's related to ideology. There are those people who consider themselves more aware of the surveillance that occurs by the government of everyday people- we definitely aren't anonymous in this society. And yet those who publicize their beliefs are considered to be radical and crazy, a concept brought about by our ideology that anyone or anything against our government is, in some way or another, treacherous. Rather than instilling knowledge, these kinds of individuals are stigmatized as crazy, thus their rantings obsolete. We talked a lot in class about movies that relate to these concepts- I just saw that movie RED with Helen Mirren, John Malkovich and Bruce Willis. Though it's comedy and not to be taken seriously, John Malkovich's character is one of those people I just talked about- a conspiracy nut always looking over his shoulder and obsessed with how the Internet and cell phones are used as tracking devices. Bruce Willis explains that, in fact, his rantings weren't entirely crazy- he was part of a government experiment and given a dose of LSD every day for a number of years. So now no matter what he says, he's obviously insane. Comical, yes, but in relation to Foucault and our class discussion of this lack of real privacy.. pretty interesting.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Foucault - Post Class

One reading/theorist that I connected well with this week was Michel Foucault. His writings on power and knowledge go hand in hand with what we've been learning this semester in both my CMC and Sociology classes. Discipline and Punish focuses on descriptions of public execution, power, ruling, discipline, sexuality, ideology, etc. In his writing, Foucault talks about two different Technologies of Punishment. The first, "Manarchial Punishment" relates to a repression of individuals  through brutal (and public) displays of execution and torture...a topic that has been discussed by several other theorists. The second, "Disciplinary Punishment"gives those who are higher up on the social ladder power over the prisoner and consequently the length of a prisoners stay in prison depends on these authority figures. 

Foucault is a structuralist who claims that power has been practiced 'transnationally', he urges for a new previously mentioned power of discipline.  He touches on concepts like justice and equality in our society and just exactly who comes to prevail through those ideas. He observes others so that he can gain more knowledge about people and their tendencies.

The last thing I liked from Foucault was his comparison of modern society to Bentham's "Panopticon" design for prisons which enabled a single guard to watch over many prisoners while remaining unseen. Michel claims ancient prisons have been replaced by clear and visible ones. However, he warns the reader that visibility is a "tarp". Through this notion of visibility he claims modern society exercises its controlling systems of power and knowledge. This sort of tracking enables institutions to keep tabs on citizens throughout their lives. Thats where his whole idea of 'carceral continuum' comes in I think too.


Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Pre post 11/17/10

After reading Michel Foucault’s article, “History of Sexuality,” it is apparent that western culture is very fixated on sexuality. Michel refers to this fixation as a repression. According to Foucault, there are two different ways of viewing sexuality. They are “Erotic art” and “Science of sexuality.” The Erotic art look on sexuality is very popular among those in European countries. In their eyes, sex is seen as an art and not as something to shutter or be shameful of. However, sexuality is still kept as a secret. This is not because they portray sexuality as dishonorable, but more to preserve its power and pleasure. Science of sexuality, however, is more focused on this urgency to promote. As Foucault states, “ We are an extraordinarily confessing society.” Western society has a constant desire to confess in order to make the truth about sexuality exist. “Confessions have spread its effects far and wide” (Foucault). We see confessions in crimes, sins, medicine, family relations, judicial system, etc.

In the reading, Michel uses the term psychoanalysis, which represents our scientific and modern form of confession. The concept of “coming out of the closet” is a perfect example of modern day confession. Although ‘coming out’ as a homosexual was not a concern that Foucault had to consider when he wrote this article, it is an example of one’s compulsion to reveal one’s sexuality. By confessing and putting forth one’s opinion and sexual preference, it confirms one’s place in society.

"On my honor, I have no witnessed, nor received, nor given any unauthorized assistance on this blog."

pre - post: Foucault

Sorry - it keeps posting in black text!


The Discipline of Punish written by Michel Foucault focuses on the notion of discipline in our society. He discusses how people with power enforce ideology upon the lower classes. The main concept he focuses on to enforce this idea is a type of architecture. The style he is referring to is a Panopticon. A Panopticon is a structure used primarily in prisons (it has also been used in work environments, hospitals, and educational institutions) that allows the people of power (police, prison guards, etc...) to watch the prisoners (or in some cases, students, patients, etc...). The Panopticon does not allow the prisoner to see who is watching them. In this we see a power struggle and a repressive situation for individuals not in power. There is an implied power that messes with minds instead of physical harassment.

The concept of the Panopticon reminded me of George Orwell's novel 1984 and the 'Big Brother' concept. Everyone is being watched, there is no sense of privacy, nothing is secret. This is a way that the people in power can maintain control. It also relates to the 1920's film Metropolis that touches on issues between the working class and the people in power in capitalist society. All three examples express a desire for control and a lack of ability for those not in control to 'move up'.

Metropolis clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j8Ba9rWhUg

The Discipline of Punish written by Michel Foucault focuses on the notion of discipline in our society. He discusses how people with power enforce ideology upon the lower classes. The main concept he focuses on to enforce this idea is a type of architecture. The style he is referring to is a Panopticon. A Panopticon is a structure used primarily in prisons (it has also been used in work environments, hospitals, and educational institutions) that allows the people of power (police, prison guards, etc...) to watch the prisoners (or in some cases, students, patients, etc...). The Panopticon does not allow the prisoner to see who is watching them. In this we see a power struggle and a repressive situation for individuals not in power. There is an implied power that messes with minds instead of physical harassment.

The concept of the Panopticon reminded me of George Orwell's novel 1984 and the 'Big Brother' concept. Everyone is being watched, there is no sense of privacy, nothing is secret. This is a way that the people in power can maintain control. It also relates to the 1920's film Metropolis that touches on issues between the working class and the people in power in capitalist society. All three examples express a desire for control and a lack of ability for those not in control to 'move up'.

Metropolis clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j8Ba9rWhUg

Pre-Class: Foucault

The Discipline of Punish written by Michel Foucault focuses on the notion of discipline in our society. He discusses how people with power enforce ideology upon the lower classes. The main concept he focuses on to enforce this idea is a type of architecture. The style he is referring to is a Panopticon. A Panopticon is a structure used primarily in prisons (it has also been used in work environments, hospitals, and educational institutions) that allows the people of power (police, prison guards, etc...) to watch the prisoners (or in some cases, students, patients, etc...). The Panopticon does not allow the prisoner to see who is watching them. In this we see a power struggle and a repressive situation for individuals not in power. There is an implied power that messes with minds instead of physical harassment.

The concept of the Panopticon reminded me of George Orwell's novel 1984 and the 'Big Brother' concept. Everyone is being watched, there is no sense of privacy, nothing is secret. This is a way that the people in power can maintain control. It also relates to the 1920's film Metropolis that touches on issues between the working class and the people in power in capitalist society. All three examples express a desire for control and a lack of ability for those not in control to 'move up'.

Metropolis clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7j8Ba9rWhUg

Foucault

One of the readings for Thursday is titled “The History of Sexuality” by Michel Foucault. She focuses on the notion of the truth and knowledge regarding sex. One quote to describe what she is trying to do in this essay is when she says “There was no deficiency, but rather an excess, a redoubling, too much rather than not enough discourse, in any case an interference between two modes of production of truth: procedures of confession, and scientific discursivity” (Foucault, 102). She is saying that there is an interference with between talking about sex and the scientific aspects of sex. She means that there is too much discourse to come up with one truth about sex. Another quote that explains this more relates to the ideology of sex when she writes “The essential features of this sexuality are not the expression of a representation that is more or less distorted by ideology, or of a misunderstanding caused by taboos; they correspond to the functional requirements of a discourse that must produce its truth” (Foucault, 104). She is saying that we cannot look at the ideology to discover a truth but we have to look at the functional requirements. In the 19th century they were trying to find out what was hidden about sex and Foucault was trying to find the truth behind the discourse of sex.

On my honor I have not given nor received nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this blog.

Pre-Post Discipline and Punish

This reading by Michel Foucault hooked me from the beginning. The description of what occurred during the Plague was enthralling and gave off a suffocating tone. The model of the disciplinary mechanism was well explained- everything has a specific order of how it occurs and there is no room for mistakes. There is also a social order where the individuals in the town are at the bottom, the syndics maintain surveillance, the intendants observe their actions, and surveillance is then reported to the magistrates or mayor. These different levels of power are exercised in a chain of order to repress the civilians. This reminds me of Karl Marx in that there is a notion of a higher class and lower class and the upper class is the one with the ability to repress the latter and exert control through power. Life is determined not by the individual but by the person who succeeds him/her in the social ladder.

This notion of surveillance reminds me of the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell. In the book, government uses pervasive surveillance and mind control in order to manipulate and control society. Even those who try to escape this model of discipline and order cannot. Through this, ideology is maintained much like during the Plague. This also relates to Louis Althusser in that the Repressive State Apparatus in the novel would be the Government and in Foucault’s example, the magistrates or Mayor. All of these systems are structured in a way that is punitive. The civilians are passive while the magistrates are active and maintain hegemonic power through their dominant ideas.

Foucault also brings up how binary division is replaced by “multiple separations, individualizing distributions, an organization in depth of surveillance and control, an intensification and a ramification of power.” (96) Foucault goes past Althusser’s notion of binary oppositions and shows how it is even more evident that we see discrimination occurring through these harsh differences.

Foucault

Michel Foucault’s article from Discipline and Punish relates very well with Louis Althusser’s and Karl Marx’s concepts of ideology. Both Althusser and Marx believe there is ‘ruling class’ or bourgeoisie. These theorists introduce the idea of a culture’s populace being controlled by certain ideas and values that are created by few, yet rule the many. These cultural ideas and norms are identified as the society’s ideology. The primary relation between Althusser’s ideology and Foucault’s essay is the notion of control or ruling. Foucault talks about the architectural concept of Panopticon. Panopticon was created as a form of jail, in which prisoners could always be watched. In mates were monitored, even if they did not know it. This allows the guards to maintain power at all times. In a sense, the guards of these prisons are acting as an ideology. They are enforcing the rules and norms of the prison, even when the prisoners themselves are unaware of their presence.
Foucault relates the prison architecture to cultures and societies by comparing this overlooking concept to schools, hospitals, and other institutions. This again relates to Althusser and his terminology ISA and RSA. The ISA and RSA institutions enforce ideologies within a culture on an everyday basis. Foucault believes these institutions act as the guards of our culture. Ever watching, enforcing, and reiterating the ideologies without the knowledge of the general populace. These groups break the culture up, allowing it to be easier to control and enforce rules throughout the entire society. It is more effective for a government or culture to maintain dominance by evading everyday life, then it would be to try and control a mass amount of people from one isolated area.
Althussser speaks of Ideology and Foucault speaks of dominance, but in the end both examine how popular ideals obtain and maintain control over societies.

Foucault Pre-Post 11/18

This week as we came across Michel Foucault’s readings I felt oddly refreshed. In addition to the reading titled, “Discipline and Punishment” “The History of Sexuality” was also a reading that explored topics that seem near impossible to escape in society. Coincidentally, when I look at the titles side by side I see something interesting in regards to how society based on the dominant narrative perceives these topics. We are supposed to have discipline when it comes to sexuality, and many people believe if you aren’t disciplined with your sexuality and sexual feelings you should be punished. So what does this mean in regards to Michel Foucault? I’m not sure but I was very intrigued by this and it really got me thinking. However, when it came to the two readings, I was definitely drawn toward “The History of Sexuality” probably because I feel it is so relevant in every aspect of life. “Sex Sells” in every form whether it is in the media or in a relationship it is something people are constantly controlled by. As Michel Foucault states in the end of this passage, “The most important elements of erotic art is linked to our knowledge about sexuality are not to be sought in the ideal, promised to us by medicine, of a healthy sexuality, nor in the humanist dream complete and flourishing sexuality, and certainly not in the lyricism of orgasm and the good feelings of bio-energy (these are but aspects of its normalizing utilization), but in this multiplication and intensification of pleasures connected to the production of the truth about sex.” (Foucault 106) When I initially read this I was unsure how to unpack it, but then the more times I read it the more I understood. What is the truth about sex? Through the media we produce false notions and believe them but we don’t really know anything is real. It is possible that this production of sex has some truth to it, but the question is there really any way of separating our fantasies of the fake with the real? This brings us back to many of our other theorists, but what is the truth?

Foucault and Discipline

Reading through Michele Foucault, I keep coming back to this idea of discipline. Perhaps it is because we just have our test last week and I have Louis Althusser on my mine, but I keep running through the idea of ideology and repressive and state apparatuses. Our entire lives are controlled by this idea of punishment, but Foucault notes early on “discipline may be identified neither with an institution nor with an apparatus” (100). In my mind, that eliminates the majority of options. There goes the government and military as well as police force and court system. However, then Foucault continues to say that “it is a type of power, a modality for its exercise, comprising a whole set of instruments, techniques, procedures, levels of application, [and] targets.”

In an attempt to unpack this commanding idea, I am thinking that perhaps it is not that the police, military, or courts do not relevance, but rather their ‘disciplinary’ techniques fall within a very particular and distinguished group. Punishment which I immediately associate with apparatuses is the ‘infliction of a penalty for an offence.” Seems simple enough and there is not much there to dispute with. Yet, ‘discipline’ which at first seems like a synonym is “the practice of training people to obey codes of behavior” and I truly believe that this is what Foucault is trying to get at. Perhaps it is just a difference in language, which our talk yesterday proved is significant, but perhaps it is something more. There is certain connotation to discipline when it is seen through a lens of taught codes of behavior. It is not just what keeps us down or gives strong authority to our live, but rather the codes in which we think and we act. It gives us direction and is one of those inescapable things in this world that we will forever be absorbed. I could be hitting in the dark here, but I do think the Foucault is trying to show us that discipline is a power trip that once learned, crosses into these repressive apparatuses. However, alone, it has the strength to stand just as strong.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Foucault- Pre Class

In Michel Foucault’s writing from Discipline and Punish, he discusses the concept of Bentham’s Panopticon. The Panopticon is an architectural structure that holds its prisoners in a way that they can all be seen from a central tower. The central tower makes it so fewer individuals are needed to exert power over many prisoners. The prisoners are unable to see each other but the central tower is able to see every one of them. Without the prisoners being able to see each other, that eliminates any possibilities of plotting to escape. The key to the concept is that the prisoners are unable to see if anyone is in the central tower or if they are being looked at. Foucault says, “Hence the major effect of the Panopticon: to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power” (98). In this way power is maintained without any violence, but through the notion that you are potentially being watched at all times.

Foucault links the concept of the Panopticon to schools, hospitals and the workplace. He says, “If the inmates are convicts, there is no danger of a plot, an attempt at collective escape, the planning of new crimes for the future, bad reciprocal influences; if they are patients, there is no danger of contagion; if they are madmen there is no risk of their committing violence upon one another; if they are school children, there is no copying, no noise, no chatter, no waste of time; if they are workers, there are no disorders, no theft, no coalitions, none of those distractions that slow down the rate of work, make it less perfect or cause accidents” (98). He says that this takes the crowd and breaks it down into manageable individuals that can be supervised. He believes that our society is very concerned with the notion of surveillance.

Video about surveillance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVTKHI5ovyc

post class, november 16th

November 16th, 2010

In class today, I was very interested in the topic of journalists and the censorship; as a citizen much of the information I receive, I know to be altered and at times lacking substance or reality in a way and this is something that directly affects society and the functionality of social constructs.

“Journalists want nothing so much as to be part of the intellectual crowd. No doubt, this structural inferiority goes a long way to explain their tendency toward anti-intellectualism.”(330)

The term anti intellectualism can be defined as being “Hostility towards and mistrust of intellect, intellectuals, and intellectual pursuits, usually expressed as the derision of education, philosophy, literature, art, and science, as impractical and contemptible. Alternately, self-described intellectuals who are alleged to fail to adhere to strict standards of rigorous scholarship may be described as anti-intellectuals”.

“The effect is censorship, which journalists practice without even being aware of it. They retain only the things capable of interesting them and ‘keeping their attention,’ and they reject as insignificant or remain indifferent to symbolic expressions that ought to reach the population as a whole.” (330)

Journalists are interested in ways to advance themselves. At times they censor, which may happen at the level of the ideological state. Journalists may experience self censorship or censorship at the hands of Government. Unconsciously, these individuals may withhold information, which we as the public attain; we must be aware that censorship over the information we receive is and does take place in our media. Journalists are in pursuit of advancing in the world of journalism and reaching a larger public and being a source of information that the public desires. At times, revealing the whole truth or the reality of actual events and what is really happening throughout the world, can pose as a threat to a journalist. The government censors the information we receive which at large is due to keeping the ideological perspective in tact in society. Providing too much information can create a shift in how we are as consumers and citizens in control by our government. Another reason censorship of information occurs is due to journalists lacking protection from harm in the pursuit to reveal real disasters and transgression. An article I came across titled State of Emergency: Censorship by Bullet In Mexico, I found to be insightful on journalists in relation to attaining important information:

New York City—At least eight journalists have been murdered in Mexico in 2010 alone, and many more have been kidnapped, threatened, or disappeared. As violence soars around the country, press workers in Mexico are regularly attacked by drug traffickers, targeted by corrupt local leaders, and harassed by federal forces. Their persecutors are seldom brought to justice. Still, in towns and cities throughout the country, journalists are daily defying Mexico’s “censorship by bullet” to expose critical truths.

Some of the key terms in this image consist of Consume, Celebrity, Sensationalism, Scandal, and Sex Tapes. There are many different types of journalists, there are journalists who in pursuit of fame or power, they attain and convey favorable stories which are consumer friendly and attempt to grab there attention through scandal and sensationalism. Another type of journalist is one who at all cost tries to inform the public of real issues, which do affect us. Many times, whether by governmental force or other, as consumers we accept and trust the information we are given. There is however much information that we are withheld not with concern for our own well being but for the well being of our government and its place of power and control over us. These two forms of journalism I believe one to be ethical while the other is unethical.


General forms of journalism with ethics aside consist of fashion, news, celebrity, investigative, sport, citizen, environmental, and business & finance journalism. Majority of these forms are purely for entertainment value while news journalism can be debated on whether or not it also is for this purpose. One issue with news journalism is the availability of media bias. The main purpose of this is to create social change or to give a voice to the oppressed yet this is not always the case with news journalism.

Monday, November 15, 2010

Media post

A few days ago I saw a commercial for this new show on E! TV called "BridalPlasty" and was absolutely blown away. Just when you thought reality TV couldn't get any worse, E! has totally taken it to a whole new level. A woman's need for an 'ideal wedding' has gone above and beyond typical standards. Look for yourself!

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/TV/11/09/bridalplasty/index.html?eref=rss_showbiz&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_showbiz+%28RSS%3A+Entertainment%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Derrida: pre-class

I thought that “Differance”, by Jacques Derrida, was an interesting read because he connects so well with many different theorists we have learned thus far. He talks about how language is important in order to understand ourselves and that words are key in doing so. De Saussure believes that “in language, there are only differences”, but Derrida says we are only left with differences. He talks about differance, which is the origin of differences in language. It is the gap (Barthes) in the language and we have to fill in the missing pieces. He suggests that words are understood by what they do not say and it is the differences that define a word. This relates to Macherey’s, ‘rupture’, because of how what is not said is the most important, just like the differences are the most important in a word because that is what defines it.

On page 127, Derrida states, “Every concept is necessarily and essentially inscribed in a chain or system, within which it refers to another and to other concepts, by the systematic play of differences” (Derrida 127). This idea of difference can be related to Zizek when he talks about ‘othering’, which is comparing us vs. them and seeing the differences between the two. This also relates to Habermas’ notion of ‘public sphere’ and Marxs’ idea of ideology, because both of these are part of a system in a certain society that refers to another concept.

Derrida also talks about signifier’s (De Saussure) and when we see one and part of it is missing we still fill in the gaps subconsciously, because we are used to seeing it that way. He says that meaning isn’t in the signifier itself, but exists in relation to other things and that a word’s value is determined by the use of other words. This reminds me of Macherey’s notion of intertextuality and how everything derives from something else and everything is related.

“On my honor I have not given, nor received, nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this work”






...instead of 'Clean Blue Crab'. Derrida I believe is constantly making distinction between the said or speech and what we read, writing. I therefore picked out this media example I tried to relate it to what Derrida is saying about how 'Writing precedes and follows speech, it comprehends it'. (Derrida)






Lady Gaga meets the Queen of England



“the most important of these figures are treated with a respect that is often quite out of proportion with their intellectual merits” (329)Here we see what theorist Bourdieu was pointing out. Much like the photo shown in class of Barbara Walters and the Dalai Lama, Lady Gaga is shown in photos meeting the Queen. We always see celebrities meeting important political figures yet a lot of the time it seems like they do not have the credentials to be doing so. There is an unbalance between the respect they have and their intellectual merits.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Here Comes Comcast - Chomsky and Herman

For one reason or another, I have always found interest in media conglomerates and their ability to absorb smaller companies. I found the subject as a whole very compelling, but more or less focus my attention on the Walt Disney Company. From Pixar to ESPN and Marvel through ABC, Disney continues to grow in power. However, when I was in middle school I remember reading about a threat for the Walt Disney Company, the threat of Comcast. Just as large conglomerates go after the smaller media branches, these big companies appear to fight themselves. Comcast’s attempt at a takeover for Disney eventually failed as a whole, however the company did buy out areas of MGM as well as regional cable channels and sports channels in pursuit of adding some competition. Nevertheless, Comcast in pursuit of a $30 billion dollar company, NBC Universal.

Announced just last year, Comcast which is now the “nation’s largest cable operator,” will take over 51% or the major of the company within the next 18 months (story reported in December of 2010). Not only will this include NBC, which once the takeover goes into effect can essentially change in name, but will include networks such as the Golf Channel, E!, USA, CNBC, MSNBC and many more. The chief exectutive of Comcast claims that this acquisition will be “a perfect fit for Comcast and will allow us to become a leader in the development and distribution of multiplatform ‘anytime, anywhere’ media that American consumers are demanding.” Now, normally I would stand back and say, “its just business.” Yet, according to Chomsky and Herman, we live “in a world of concentrated wealth and major conflicts of class interest” especially in the terms of “systematic propaganda.” Comcast is on a power hunt and as we sit back and watch them acquire NBC and all that comes with it, what effects can this have on our future media sources? It may appear as if we have hundreds of options, but at the end of the day the same few companies own them all.

New York Times Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/business/media/04nbc.html

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Monday, November 8, 2010

Media example

Stereotypes in advertising

Propaganda- pre post

After reading "A Propaganda Model", I immediately thought to relate it to that show Modern Family.. more specifically, the most recent episode. Mitchell and Cameron adopt a Vietnamese baby, Lily. Cameron wants to put Lily in a commercial for a baby furniture store, but Mitchell is against it, so Cameron goes behind his back and brings Lily anyway. The commercial is Lily and another Asian baby sitting in sailor costumes, with stereotypical voiceovers with Godzilla "slashing prices" and "knocking down crib sales". When Herman and Chromsky talk about the automatic pull towards stereotypes companies use in order to meet their advertising goals, this scene totally stood out to me. It's entertaining in the aspect that we all know how wrong a commercial like that would be-- even though it proves for good television in a great show, the value comes from the fact that we, as spectators, know for a fact that it's an offensive commercial- yet everyone on set has no problem with the stereotype.

The word "propaganda" has an obvious negative connotation, and when it comes to media, especially the media I am accustomed to, it scares me. Before this minor I had little to no idea what exactly ads can do, and what power they actually hold... and now that I know, it's very daunting. I completely agree with what KHughes posted at the conclusion of her post --

"This lack of knowledge allows the values or ideas to seem natural and become a part of the dominate ideology of the culture. This idea of ownership is only the first filter that information must pass through before the public can become aware of it, but it is a powerful filter."

Propaganda has been used to completely alter cultures, ideals, ethics and morals. I used to think the ads just passed me by, that I wasn't affected by the flawless faces and Pleasantville families.. and now looking more critically, even a split second has the power to change me. That's seriously daunting. I feel like Herman and Chromsky reiterate what we've been learning from the beginning of our CMC courses, and it rings true. The advertising does its job, but if little things like ads for face cream and Disney movies have the power to change the way we think, then think about how easy it can be to affect us in a bigger, more powerful sense.