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.

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.

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.