If you looked at this site before Friday 10/5, note the additional short story, 'The Introduction' by Virgina Woolf to the right.
For Wednesday of next week, read the first chapter of A Room of One's Own by Virginia Woolf, and all of the Woolf stories. Also read the excerpt from Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex found in Modern Literary Theory, the Annette Kolodny excerpt found on page 163 of the same, and the relevant portions of the introductions to those sections . This is a bit of reading, so don't leave it for the last moment, and be prepared to demonstrate your reading in quiz form.
After you've read, write a 250-400 word response which first points out a specific passage, asks a question about it, and then tries to answer that question.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Monday, October 1, 2007
Pretty Woman
I initially had some trouble coming up with a film I could do a Marxist reading of, but after thinking for a while and doing some research on the internet I settled on Pretty Woman. This movie may seem like an unlikely choice but I believe it works on two levels.
Edward, the story’s hero, makes his fortune buying out failing companies and selling them off piece by piece. He makes his offer when people are backed against a wall in financial desperation, often shattering their own dreams for their company. In one scene Edward tells the Vivian, the prostitute he picked up, that they both “screw people for money.” His business is exploiting people when they are at their weakest leaving them with no choice but to yield to his will, a problem Marx and his followers enthusiastically criticize in their writings.
The main character of the movie, Vivian, has been forced into a life of prostitution because there is no other way for her to make money. Her life circumstances, her class status, lack of schooling and prior economical position, makes it almost impossible for her to achieve social or economical mobility on her own. This idea that capitalism prevents the poor and working class from overcoming their situation on their own is another Marxist idea. Vivian needs the help of a benevolent upper class man to get out of poverty. Capitalism forces people to sell their labor, or in Vivian’s case her body, for whatever they can get. She has been convinced that the exploitation she experiences as a hooker in Hollywood is her own choice, making her a willing victim, a problem Gramsci called to attention in his essay “The Intellectuals.” She has been coerced into believing that selling herself is her choice instead of the direct result of a capitalist society that controls her.
Edward, the story’s hero, makes his fortune buying out failing companies and selling them off piece by piece. He makes his offer when people are backed against a wall in financial desperation, often shattering their own dreams for their company. In one scene Edward tells the Vivian, the prostitute he picked up, that they both “screw people for money.” His business is exploiting people when they are at their weakest leaving them with no choice but to yield to his will, a problem Marx and his followers enthusiastically criticize in their writings.
The main character of the movie, Vivian, has been forced into a life of prostitution because there is no other way for her to make money. Her life circumstances, her class status, lack of schooling and prior economical position, makes it almost impossible for her to achieve social or economical mobility on her own. This idea that capitalism prevents the poor and working class from overcoming their situation on their own is another Marxist idea. Vivian needs the help of a benevolent upper class man to get out of poverty. Capitalism forces people to sell their labor, or in Vivian’s case her body, for whatever they can get. She has been convinced that the exploitation she experiences as a hooker in Hollywood is her own choice, making her a willing victim, a problem Gramsci called to attention in his essay “The Intellectuals.” She has been coerced into believing that selling herself is her choice instead of the direct result of a capitalist society that controls her.
Marxist Reading of The Prince and Me
In the Prince and Me, Julia Stiles is a common American student. She is trying to do very well in school and trying to become a doctor. Then the Prince of Denmark decides to leave Denmark and come to America in disguise to experience more then his own royal-ness. The two meet and despite her attempts to stay focused on school they fall for each other and start to date. Then of course comes the twist and she finds out he is the Prince. This puts a huge strain on everything because she is from a very different social class than he is. He says he doesn't care but he leaves none the less. She chases after him and goes to Denmark, and although there they both finally seem to be over there social class and economic class differences the rest of the country of Denmark are not.
The queen in particular is very much against the two being together and marrying because Julia Stiles character is not on the same level as the royal family. The big issue here is the money and the power that the upper class or royal family holds over everyone else. Marx says that this is a problem and that one day the lower class will revolt, but this movie has an interesting sort of twist. Instead of the lower class revolting, a powerful member of the upper class, the prince, rebels against this presupposed set of divisions and tries to bring the classes closer because he is marrying the lower class.
In the end she wants to finish school and he says he will wait for her. And then of course there is a terrible sequel that they get married in. Even in text class issues still appear and have an effect on the audience that watches the movie. Balibar and Macherey said, "Class struggle is not abolished in the literary text and the literary effects which it produces. They bring about the reproduction, as dominant, of the ideology of the dominant class." I think this is basically saying that in fact the text actually just re-enforces the fact that there is one upper class that is dominant and their ideology will then remain the dominant one.
The queen in particular is very much against the two being together and marrying because Julia Stiles character is not on the same level as the royal family. The big issue here is the money and the power that the upper class or royal family holds over everyone else. Marx says that this is a problem and that one day the lower class will revolt, but this movie has an interesting sort of twist. Instead of the lower class revolting, a powerful member of the upper class, the prince, rebels against this presupposed set of divisions and tries to bring the classes closer because he is marrying the lower class.
In the end she wants to finish school and he says he will wait for her. And then of course there is a terrible sequel that they get married in. Even in text class issues still appear and have an effect on the audience that watches the movie. Balibar and Macherey said, "Class struggle is not abolished in the literary text and the literary effects which it produces. They bring about the reproduction, as dominant, of the ideology of the dominant class." I think this is basically saying that in fact the text actually just re-enforces the fact that there is one upper class that is dominant and their ideology will then remain the dominant one.
Marxism in Movies
It took me a long time but the only movie that comes to mind is the movie Coming To America it keeps popping into my head. The movie is based on something that probably wouldn’t happen in real life but it does seem interesting. It is about a prince named Akeem who comes to
I don’t know if this was an appropriate movie to pick because It is pretty hard to explain things if you didn’t see the movie. I don’t know if this is relevant but I recall a time in class where we said the only way for people to become equal is if like the upper-class give up what they have or something like that. At the end of the movie the prince asked his wife if she wanted him to give up the throne and she refused. I just thought that was an interesting fact because the truth is no one wants to give up what they have. Then there are a couple of scenes on the King where he is hegemonic. He tells everyone what to do through out the film until the end where Akeem disobeys him and I guess you could say that he revolted against him. There are many other Marxist things that happened in the film as well but I am unable to remember exact details about things.
'Crash'
The movie that I thought had marx ideas in it was 'Crash'. This movie is based on a recopilation of an example of what lifeis for many different people in different social classes. It touches on many aspects of life, from slavery to being wealthy. It is just as Gramci, would name the intellectuals, meaning that there were the "traditional", these where the wealthy, who had professional responsibilities, who had the role of' hierarchy', they where the ones who had the power and dominance over the rest social classes. There was the other social class who where as Gramci would state "organic", these where anyone who will work at any job that was suitable in their class. They played the role of the "proletariat", who where the working class, in this movie resembling the workers in the house of the wealthy people. In this movie we could see many examples of discrimination, racism, and many injustices. But it all relates of what Althusser shows in his essay 'Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses', that "There must in a practical way hail or interpellate individuals as subjects, so that they perceive themselves as such, with rights and duties, the obligatory accompaniments". That all each person plays there own role in life, and that eventhough they may not be aware off, but are designated by their social class in which they live in.
There is a scene in this movie where there is an example of what marx would use as 'Hierarchy' vs the 'Proletariat', in where the wealthy people discriminate the working people in this case, the 'key maker'(lock-smith) who was in charge of changing the lock after there was a break-in on the house, the women in the wealthy couple would discriminate the locksmith by telling her husband that he might keep a set of keys and give it to his friends, in this case judging them as 'thieves', where as the only thing the worker was doing is trying to get the work done in order to get paid and returning to his everyday life. Another scene of similar results where was the same locksith changed the lock on a store where the owner would not want him to finish his job completely, and as a consequence there was a break-in, and the store owner lost everything and blamed the locksmth, where he later tried to kill. In thae scene od the store owner trying to kill the locksmth, I thought that this was an example of Marx ideology, it was after the store owner shot the girl who stood in front of his dad's arms as a way of protecting him, as thinking she had an invisible cloth, that his dad told her earlier that could be bullet proof. The store owner saw this as an ideology that the girl had been his angel that would make everything get better, and the desperate father after thinking he had lost his daughter saw the ideology of the moment as a miracle that she was alive after reseaving a shot, but it all at the end was due to the fact that luckily, the owner's daughter after buying the gun, also bought 'blanks' for the gun not knpwing they wheren't real bullets, and also the store owner not knowing it was blanks that he load on the gun that was the thing that made him not kill the girl. There was at the end the scene where in a van there where many people locked and chained, resembling slaves who where going to be sold in order to exploid them, but where later let free in order to find a better life on a new country. In the end, there is a Marx example in every type of lifestyle, in the example of social classes, to the example of discrimination that is still and will be a problem in everyday life.
There is a scene in this movie where there is an example of what marx would use as 'Hierarchy' vs the 'Proletariat', in where the wealthy people discriminate the working people in this case, the 'key maker'(lock-smith) who was in charge of changing the lock after there was a break-in on the house, the women in the wealthy couple would discriminate the locksmith by telling her husband that he might keep a set of keys and give it to his friends, in this case judging them as 'thieves', where as the only thing the worker was doing is trying to get the work done in order to get paid and returning to his everyday life. Another scene of similar results where was the same locksith changed the lock on a store where the owner would not want him to finish his job completely, and as a consequence there was a break-in, and the store owner lost everything and blamed the locksmth, where he later tried to kill. In thae scene od the store owner trying to kill the locksmth, I thought that this was an example of Marx ideology, it was after the store owner shot the girl who stood in front of his dad's arms as a way of protecting him, as thinking she had an invisible cloth, that his dad told her earlier that could be bullet proof. The store owner saw this as an ideology that the girl had been his angel that would make everything get better, and the desperate father after thinking he had lost his daughter saw the ideology of the moment as a miracle that she was alive after reseaving a shot, but it all at the end was due to the fact that luckily, the owner's daughter after buying the gun, also bought 'blanks' for the gun not knpwing they wheren't real bullets, and also the store owner not knowing it was blanks that he load on the gun that was the thing that made him not kill the girl. There was at the end the scene where in a van there where many people locked and chained, resembling slaves who where going to be sold in order to exploid them, but where later let free in order to find a better life on a new country. In the end, there is a Marx example in every type of lifestyle, in the example of social classes, to the example of discrimination that is still and will be a problem in everyday life.
"The Matrix"
The MAtRiX
Disclaimer: The following text is intended for those who have seen The Matrix. It will not give plot summaries; introduce every character or event, significant or insignificant to the assignment, nor will it discuss the super-graphical cinematic innovations.
If one stares long enough at the title ‘The Matrix’, your mind begins to play tricks on you. For instance, if you eliminate the letter T, and I in the word ‘Matrix’, it just spells out Marx. I just thought this was interesting to share as I will, nevertheless, discuss certain Marxist ideas that I found appealing in this movie. This paper will stray away from the many controversial, philosophical concepts of mind vs. body, religion, perception, and other aesthetical, metaphysical, and epistemological arguments. I will make an attempt to generally focus on the relationship between Neo and Morpheus, under the scopes of the ‘Intellectuals’. Also, I will attempt to re-introduce the concept of hegemony as it is extremely evident in this movie.
Morpheus would definitely be responsible for the famous repetitive concept; “Free your Mind”, just as he freed Neo’s mind. Marxist ideology is not easy to cope with. Nevertheless, Marx did have a vision. As much as his works are viewed as theories, I don’t think Marx himself had intentions to show the world the way it is. I think he wanted to change the world, by preventing certain Historical phenomena’s.
Morpheus, in his own Zion like heaven appears to be unique. He stands out because he seems to have higher belief value, and experiences a greater understanding of a productive future; where the war between the humans and the machines seizes to exist, a place where these two entities live collectively and in harmony (communism?). Interestingly enough, this so-called vision of his isn’t entirely his. The Oracle in this movie symbolizes the very concept of Ideology. Only the higher intelligentsia can understand this ideology. Only with the help of the Intellectual can a society conform to change. The intellectual would educate the proletarian class, so as to put an end to the class struggle, and produce an equal production/labor force. To me, Morpheus represents the higher intelligentsia of the bourgeois origin, who has been fused with Neo (who lives in the Matrix, and symbolizes the lower proletarian sector, which in the real world (Zion) he is nothing more then a physical battery for the machines).
Hegemony can be seen from two different end points. First, from the Machine-like-AI, who have established hegemony over the humans, and secondly, the humans’ attempt to achieve and move forward towards hegemony over the Machine. This very concept of ‘who has dominance over one another’ becomes an everlasting cycle introduced by Marx. He seeks to find a solution to stray away from hegemony (capitalism). The humans advancing towards hegemony is present when those individuals who are freed from the matrix, ultimately entering, and becoming part a class. A class Gramsci would consider “Organic Intellectuals of the working class [who] are defined on the one hand by their role in production and in the organization of work and on the other hand by their “directive” political role, focused on the Party. It is though this assumption of conscious responsibility, aided by absorption of ideas and personnel form the more advanced bourgeois intellectual strata [(Morpheus)], that the proletariat can escape from defensive corporatism [(Machines/Matrix)] and economism and advance toward hegemony” (p2). Once this class or organization has been fully established then can they only strive for change categorized by a revolution. Hence the title of the last Matrix film, “Matrix Revolutions”.
Disclaimer: The following text is intended for those who have seen The Matrix. It will not give plot summaries; introduce every character or event, significant or insignificant to the assignment, nor will it discuss the super-graphical cinematic innovations.
If one stares long enough at the title ‘The Matrix’, your mind begins to play tricks on you. For instance, if you eliminate the letter T, and I in the word ‘Matrix’, it just spells out Marx. I just thought this was interesting to share as I will, nevertheless, discuss certain Marxist ideas that I found appealing in this movie. This paper will stray away from the many controversial, philosophical concepts of mind vs. body, religion, perception, and other aesthetical, metaphysical, and epistemological arguments. I will make an attempt to generally focus on the relationship between Neo and Morpheus, under the scopes of the ‘Intellectuals’. Also, I will attempt to re-introduce the concept of hegemony as it is extremely evident in this movie.
Morpheus would definitely be responsible for the famous repetitive concept; “Free your Mind”, just as he freed Neo’s mind. Marxist ideology is not easy to cope with. Nevertheless, Marx did have a vision. As much as his works are viewed as theories, I don’t think Marx himself had intentions to show the world the way it is. I think he wanted to change the world, by preventing certain Historical phenomena’s.
Morpheus, in his own Zion like heaven appears to be unique. He stands out because he seems to have higher belief value, and experiences a greater understanding of a productive future; where the war between the humans and the machines seizes to exist, a place where these two entities live collectively and in harmony (communism?). Interestingly enough, this so-called vision of his isn’t entirely his. The Oracle in this movie symbolizes the very concept of Ideology. Only the higher intelligentsia can understand this ideology. Only with the help of the Intellectual can a society conform to change. The intellectual would educate the proletarian class, so as to put an end to the class struggle, and produce an equal production/labor force. To me, Morpheus represents the higher intelligentsia of the bourgeois origin, who has been fused with Neo (who lives in the Matrix, and symbolizes the lower proletarian sector, which in the real world (Zion) he is nothing more then a physical battery for the machines).
Hegemony can be seen from two different end points. First, from the Machine-like-AI, who have established hegemony over the humans, and secondly, the humans’ attempt to achieve and move forward towards hegemony over the Machine. This very concept of ‘who has dominance over one another’ becomes an everlasting cycle introduced by Marx. He seeks to find a solution to stray away from hegemony (capitalism). The humans advancing towards hegemony is present when those individuals who are freed from the matrix, ultimately entering, and becoming part a class. A class Gramsci would consider “Organic Intellectuals of the working class [who] are defined on the one hand by their role in production and in the organization of work and on the other hand by their “directive” political role, focused on the Party. It is though this assumption of conscious responsibility, aided by absorption of ideas and personnel form the more advanced bourgeois intellectual strata [(Morpheus)], that the proletariat can escape from defensive corporatism [(Machines/Matrix)] and economism and advance toward hegemony” (p2). Once this class or organization has been fully established then can they only strive for change categorized by a revolution. Hence the title of the last Matrix film, “Matrix Revolutions”.
Napoleon Dynamite
If Napoleon has to be classified, he is a dork, among all other class epithets within American schools: geeks, dorks, nerds, jocks, etc. By definition, dorks such as Napoleon and his best friend Pedro, are socially inept. They only hangout with each other but not with other classes. They even rarely communicate with others. Napoleon is constantly bullied pushed against the locker by other kids like John or this big dude whose character name I cannot remember. He loves drawing exotic animals like unicorns or ligers. His actions or thought process are way beyond others' comprehension.
Kids from "upper classes" like Summer and John constantly look down on Napoleon. I don't see what's really different about them than Napoleon, they believe they're of different species and can never mingle with each other. Class system obviously exists.
Also there is a "class struggle": asking hot chicks out for Dance Night. Pedro asks Summer only to be miserably rejected, and ends up with Deb, another dork from school. Napoleon asks Trisha by drawing her a portrait which is despised by Trisha, but Trisha must accept because of her mom's pressure. When they eventually arrive at Dance Hall, Trisha ditches Napoleon, and joins the dork group, Pedro and Deb. Unable to mingle, they can only look on others dancing.
President election is coming. Pedro decides to run for it, and initiates campaigns against another candidate, Summer. On candidate speech day, Summer's speech and performance are successful. Pedro gives very deficient and dull speech, and is unprepared for a performance. Napoleon, who's been practicing aerobic dancing, improvises and volunteers to dance. His performance is fantastic. The crowd applauds way louder than when they did on Summer, to suggest Pedro's victory. This is the moment, I believe, that they move up the class system and become popular.
Kids from "upper classes" like Summer and John constantly look down on Napoleon. I don't see what's really different about them than Napoleon, they believe they're of different species and can never mingle with each other. Class system obviously exists.
Also there is a "class struggle": asking hot chicks out for Dance Night. Pedro asks Summer only to be miserably rejected, and ends up with Deb, another dork from school. Napoleon asks Trisha by drawing her a portrait which is despised by Trisha, but Trisha must accept because of her mom's pressure. When they eventually arrive at Dance Hall, Trisha ditches Napoleon, and joins the dork group, Pedro and Deb. Unable to mingle, they can only look on others dancing.
President election is coming. Pedro decides to run for it, and initiates campaigns against another candidate, Summer. On candidate speech day, Summer's speech and performance are successful. Pedro gives very deficient and dull speech, and is unprepared for a performance. Napoleon, who's been practicing aerobic dancing, improvises and volunteers to dance. His performance is fantastic. The crowd applauds way louder than when they did on Summer, to suggest Pedro's victory. This is the moment, I believe, that they move up the class system and become popular.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Accepted
I watched the movie Accepted this morning with the assignment for this weekend floating through my mind. It was with this in mind that I started to see these connections forming. These similarities between what was shown in the movie and what Marx’s ideals were. For starters, the whole movie is about what happens when people are repressed to the point of desperation by an overbearing and judgmental upper class. In the words of Sherman Schrader, “This is the act of a desperate, wildly unrealistic individual”. The main characters in the movie have one way or another found themselves without a college to attend in the coming year and are thus forced to find an alternative, in this case, to band together and make a college of their own. This too would have met the approval of Marx, who urged others to create their own communities and establishments through cooperation and a team effort. For the majority of this movie the main characters struggle to find a way to make their fake college passable as a real one, and to satisfy the needs of their student body. In the end they work together to make their college a success and earn it a one year trial accreditation from the Ohio State board of accreditation. This is an example of the Marxist ideal of working together for a common goal; everybody in the college comes from a different place with different stories but they all work together for the betterment of themselves and the college as a whole. Their progress does not go unchallenged, as the dean of nearby Harmon college seeks to undue them. This is an example of the higher, or ruling, class oppressing the lower class. The movie completes the example of successful Marxism by having the underdogs succeed and have their goals realized.
Suggestions for Marxism readings
13 going on 30
Forest Gump
The Prince and the Pauper
Accepted
Bruce Almighty
Hope these help, there’s a list of movies that can be watched and used in the Link Below:
http://movie6.net/?p=185
Forest Gump
The Prince and the Pauper
Accepted
Bruce Almighty
Hope these help, there’s a list of movies that can be watched and used in the Link Below:
http://movie6.net/?p=185
300
While it might be a bit unconventional, I feel that the Zach Snyder film released earlier this year, "300" is rife with Marxist beliefs. For one, take a look at the tag line and the most quoted quote of the film: "THIS IS SPARTA!" What that quote refers to is the united Spartans who always fight and never surrender (when asked to by the Persian messenger early on in the film). Most of this movie is about the three-hundred Spartans united as one fighting against the massive Persian army, as they fight was one solid unit rather than 300 men killing a whole bunch of people. That sounds a lot like the proletariat (Spartans) rising up against the bourgeoisies (Persians). One particular line uttered by King Leonidas as the Spartans are about to enter battle echoes this idea: "The world will know that free men stood against a tyrant, that few stood against many...". This quote sums up the main idea of the film, ergo, this film is basically a Marxist film.
There is a scene early on the film where the Spartans are marching towards the Hot Gates (to defend them from the Persian army) and encounter the Arcadian forces who wish to serve as back up in battle. After asking a few Arcadians what their profession was (who replied to the question with answers such as "sculptor" and "potter", while the Spartans answered the question with a loud battle cry, united as one. United with a purpose. Much like the proletariat united against the bourgeoisies.
There is a scene early on the film where the Spartans are marching towards the Hot Gates (to defend them from the Persian army) and encounter the Arcadian forces who wish to serve as back up in battle. After asking a few Arcadians what their profession was (who replied to the question with answers such as "sculptor" and "potter", while the Spartans answered the question with a loud battle cry, united as one. United with a purpose. Much like the proletariat united against the bourgeoisies.
Pulp Fiction
When I first thought about a Marxist type film it took me sometime to figure out which film to pick. After some thought, it became clear that Pulp Fiction was the film to pick when I realized how Marxist this movie is. Pulp Fiction is a unique movie in structure, as it shows how many different stories converge and affect the other stories. This could be interpreted as a Marxist film is in the way that Joules and Vincent work for Marcellus Wallace. These two do some of Marcellus’s work, which includes getting his money, taking his wife out, and so on. This immediately shows who has power over whom. Vincent eventually has to take Marcellus’s wife out and he is dreading it because of it being his boss’s wife and thus adding some anxiety. He even says to himself that “nothing’s going to happen, just go out to dinner, and go home.” One of my favorite scenes in the movie is when Marcellus starts talking to Butch (Bruce Willis) about an upcoming fight he is going to be in. Marcellus has a lot of money on this fight and is telling Butch that he goes down in this fight. He says to Butch “The night of the fight, you may feel a slight sting. That's pride fucking with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps.” Here Marcellus not only is telling him what to do, but also assigning value to certain things. He is telling him that pride isn’t something that should be valued, what should be valued is the money he is getting. Most people are brought up saying that pride is one of the most important things, without pride you’re a sellout. I just thought that was an interesting point.
The Pianist and Titanic combined
I have seen Titanic on numerous accounts but not once did I ever examine it as a Marxist reading. However, through our discussions in class and reading assignments, I can now review this movie through Marx’s view points.
In Titanic, the idea of a class system is illustrated from the very beginning of the movie. As the passengers enter the ship, they are automatically separated according to their class. The upper stories of the ship are reserved for the upper class and the lower stories for the middle and lower class. The upper class is presented with luxury, beautiful rooms, and a spacious dinning hall while the lower classmen are bestowed with small dwellings to basically sleep and eat in. The ironic aspect here is that Titanic was supposed to migrate its passengers to America, the land of opportunity and freedom, yet the ship itself contained social and political issues.
The class struggle is further witnessed by Jack and Rose’s forbidden relationship. Even thought Rose was engaged to a rich, blue blooded business man, she fell in love with an individual who was below her class. Her mother, due to Jack’s social status, forbade her to have any contact with him. Rose and Jack however, strived to unite the two classes in a unique manner, their love for one another. Perhaps, they were hoping to break the “fetters” that chained down each generation. However, this task was not accomplished because Jack died at the end of the movie.
Another situation that demonstrates the social and class struggle in the movie was when the ship collided with an iceberg and began to sink. Since, the creators of Titanic believed that the ship was unsinkable, even though created by metal, they did not provide enough emergency boats in case of an emergency. Due to the shortage of emergency boats, the upper class was given the opportunity to escape the ship first. This concept is hard to comprehend because how does any individual decide who gets to die and who is permitted to live. Should someone’s existence be truly valued by materialistic objects? I also recall how the gates in the lower stories of the ship, where the lower classmen dwelled, were locked which prevented individuals from escaping death. Basically, in this situation, the established class system caused people their lives.
Another movie in which Marx’s ideas were portrayed in was The Pianist. In this movie individuals who were not Christian, German or from the Arian race were executed by the Nazis. The non-Arian citizens of Germany were considered lower class individuals and were shipped of to concentration camps. While the upper class dwelled in luxury and wealth, the lower class was forced to work vigorously. The lower class citizens were abused, tortured, and murdered. Once again, who has the right to decide which class an individual belongs to? This class struggle caused a great deal of deaths as well. However, in this society the upper class failed and eventually vanished.
In Titanic, the idea of a class system is illustrated from the very beginning of the movie. As the passengers enter the ship, they are automatically separated according to their class. The upper stories of the ship are reserved for the upper class and the lower stories for the middle and lower class. The upper class is presented with luxury, beautiful rooms, and a spacious dinning hall while the lower classmen are bestowed with small dwellings to basically sleep and eat in. The ironic aspect here is that Titanic was supposed to migrate its passengers to America, the land of opportunity and freedom, yet the ship itself contained social and political issues.
The class struggle is further witnessed by Jack and Rose’s forbidden relationship. Even thought Rose was engaged to a rich, blue blooded business man, she fell in love with an individual who was below her class. Her mother, due to Jack’s social status, forbade her to have any contact with him. Rose and Jack however, strived to unite the two classes in a unique manner, their love for one another. Perhaps, they were hoping to break the “fetters” that chained down each generation. However, this task was not accomplished because Jack died at the end of the movie.
Another situation that demonstrates the social and class struggle in the movie was when the ship collided with an iceberg and began to sink. Since, the creators of Titanic believed that the ship was unsinkable, even though created by metal, they did not provide enough emergency boats in case of an emergency. Due to the shortage of emergency boats, the upper class was given the opportunity to escape the ship first. This concept is hard to comprehend because how does any individual decide who gets to die and who is permitted to live. Should someone’s existence be truly valued by materialistic objects? I also recall how the gates in the lower stories of the ship, where the lower classmen dwelled, were locked which prevented individuals from escaping death. Basically, in this situation, the established class system caused people their lives.
Another movie in which Marx’s ideas were portrayed in was The Pianist. In this movie individuals who were not Christian, German or from the Arian race were executed by the Nazis. The non-Arian citizens of Germany were considered lower class individuals and were shipped of to concentration camps. While the upper class dwelled in luxury and wealth, the lower class was forced to work vigorously. The lower class citizens were abused, tortured, and murdered. Once again, who has the right to decide which class an individual belongs to? This class struggle caused a great deal of deaths as well. However, in this society the upper class failed and eventually vanished.
Fearless
Finding a movie that seemed to fit with the Marxist theme was pretty complicated. I spent a majority of my weekend trying to complete this task. Hours and Hours of watching movies was a serious test of my dedication to do well on this response.
Jet Li’s Fearless seemed to fit the Marxist theme, the Chinese resembled the Proletariat, downtrodden and exploited by there English colonizers. The English, represent the Bourgeoisie they are educated, wealthy, and bit by bit taking over the Chinese way of life.
Fearless was about a Kung Fu Master who has to balance his ego and pride against maintaining Chinese values against the English/ Anglo Saxon influence that is moving rapidly across China. The English host a martial arts competition in hopes of proving that the Chinese no longer have skillful warriors, this in turn will lower the Chinese spirits and make them all the more easier to control without any resistance. The English want the Chinese to be more like them and lose roots of their Chinese heritage. This is seen when Jet Li’s character comes back to his town after being away for some time, he finds that English troops now occupy his village, also his best friend who was a proud Chinese business owner has changed how dresses, he now dresses like and is looking to sell his Business to the English.
This relates back to Marx and the idea of everyone becoming the same, becoming a homogenous unit, everyone is like the other. This movie can also relate to Gramsci and the idea that the lower class intellectual want to become more like the educated upper class intellectuals, in this case the English.
At the end of the movie Jet Li is assassinated by a Japanese investor who will lose everything if the Chinese were to be triumphant, unfortunately his plan failed Jet Li characters death, unite the Chinese who have a new found pride in themselves and their culture.
Jet Li’s Fearless seemed to fit the Marxist theme, the Chinese resembled the Proletariat, downtrodden and exploited by there English colonizers. The English, represent the Bourgeoisie they are educated, wealthy, and bit by bit taking over the Chinese way of life.
Fearless was about a Kung Fu Master who has to balance his ego and pride against maintaining Chinese values against the English/ Anglo Saxon influence that is moving rapidly across China. The English host a martial arts competition in hopes of proving that the Chinese no longer have skillful warriors, this in turn will lower the Chinese spirits and make them all the more easier to control without any resistance. The English want the Chinese to be more like them and lose roots of their Chinese heritage. This is seen when Jet Li’s character comes back to his town after being away for some time, he finds that English troops now occupy his village, also his best friend who was a proud Chinese business owner has changed how dresses, he now dresses like and is looking to sell his Business to the English.
This relates back to Marx and the idea of everyone becoming the same, becoming a homogenous unit, everyone is like the other. This movie can also relate to Gramsci and the idea that the lower class intellectual want to become more like the educated upper class intellectuals, in this case the English.
At the end of the movie Jet Li is assassinated by a Japanese investor who will lose everything if the Chinese were to be triumphant, unfortunately his plan failed Jet Li characters death, unite the Chinese who have a new found pride in themselves and their culture.
Fight Club
I have long since held the belief that Fight Club is the most violent movie one will ever see that is not about violence. The entire movie encapsulates a proletariat revolution.
I do not have time to go into the implications of the two main plot driving forces (being the characters Tyler Durdin and the incessantly unnamed everyman that is played by Ed Norton) being in reality two sides of one schizophrenic person so for the purposes of this discussion let us entertain that they are entirely one man referred to as “the main character”.
If Carl Marx is right then a revolution of the proletariat is inevitable. This film gives us one vision of how it is possible. First and foremost, the re-valuation of cooperativeness. Considering the scene where the recruitment begins and the candidates begin showing up at the house. The main character first insists that all recruits dress the same, have the same haircut, sleep in identical personal spaces and share in the same physical chores of maintenance to fortify the integrity of the structure (the house) they all exist within. With constant vocal reminders in the form of daily announcements dictated to the recruits as they work the main character reinforces sameness among the participants with phrases like, “you are not a special or beautiful snowflake, you are the same decaying organic matter as everyone else.” The first half of the movie very patiently sets up the foundations of a communal, socialized machine.
The rebellion starts slowly and escalates as the members of these “clubs” engage in repeated acts of vandalism and terrorism each designed to separate the individual from the dominating social structure in power.
By way of power shifting let us consider the scene in which a government official (easily seen as a member of the Bourgeoisie) announces to the press that he will personally see to the eradication of these “underground boxing clubs” which in the movie, serve as the meetings for these rebels and the place where they receive new tasks referred to as “homework”. Shortly after his announcement the official excuses himself to use the bathroom where he is met by members of the exact group of radicals he wishes to disband. He is accosted by these men, the main character among them, and the magnitude of the underground revolution is revealed simultaneously to the official (representing the dominant social class) and the audience. “…you’re going to call off your rigorous investigation, you are going to publicly state there is no underground organization… the people you are after are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances, we guard you while you sleep. Do not f*ck with us!” This scene is extremely significant because it shows the beginning of the shift in power.
The rebellion’s agenda culminates in a final act of socialist serving terrorism whereby a plot is hatched to destroy the building that house the national debt record thus removing the power of the dominator culture over the individual and reducing everyone to equals.
I do not have time to go into the implications of the two main plot driving forces (being the characters Tyler Durdin and the incessantly unnamed everyman that is played by Ed Norton) being in reality two sides of one schizophrenic person so for the purposes of this discussion let us entertain that they are entirely one man referred to as “the main character”.
If Carl Marx is right then a revolution of the proletariat is inevitable. This film gives us one vision of how it is possible. First and foremost, the re-valuation of cooperativeness. Considering the scene where the recruitment begins and the candidates begin showing up at the house. The main character first insists that all recruits dress the same, have the same haircut, sleep in identical personal spaces and share in the same physical chores of maintenance to fortify the integrity of the structure (the house) they all exist within. With constant vocal reminders in the form of daily announcements dictated to the recruits as they work the main character reinforces sameness among the participants with phrases like, “you are not a special or beautiful snowflake, you are the same decaying organic matter as everyone else.” The first half of the movie very patiently sets up the foundations of a communal, socialized machine.
The rebellion starts slowly and escalates as the members of these “clubs” engage in repeated acts of vandalism and terrorism each designed to separate the individual from the dominating social structure in power.
By way of power shifting let us consider the scene in which a government official (easily seen as a member of the Bourgeoisie) announces to the press that he will personally see to the eradication of these “underground boxing clubs” which in the movie, serve as the meetings for these rebels and the place where they receive new tasks referred to as “homework”. Shortly after his announcement the official excuses himself to use the bathroom where he is met by members of the exact group of radicals he wishes to disband. He is accosted by these men, the main character among them, and the magnitude of the underground revolution is revealed simultaneously to the official (representing the dominant social class) and the audience. “…you’re going to call off your rigorous investigation, you are going to publicly state there is no underground organization… the people you are after are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances, we guard you while you sleep. Do not f*ck with us!” This scene is extremely significant because it shows the beginning of the shift in power.
The rebellion’s agenda culminates in a final act of socialist serving terrorism whereby a plot is hatched to destroy the building that house the national debt record thus removing the power of the dominator culture over the individual and reducing everyone to equals.
Mean Girls (Post 2)
Cady Heron is a “home schooled jungle freak” according to Regina Gorge. However after Regina back pedals about an ex boyfriend she decides that she will infiltrate the “Plastics” by becoming Regina’s friend. This does not go so well. At first Regina and Cady are what seems like the best of friends, but as things continue between then Cady begins to emulate Regina. This to me was a clear example of what happens when you try to be something your not.(changing social classes because of social oppression) Cady wanted to go outside of her social class and as a result of that she was chewed up and spit out. Social classes don’t care where you start off, but when you finally get through fighting to get to a certain class you have to fight just as hard to stay there. In other words no matter how hard you work as a member of the lower class even if you achieve your goals you have to work harder than everyone else especially if your poor/lower class
Regina, Karen and Gretchen are the most popular girls in the school. By being friends with them she becomes popular but loses herself in the process. Elements of Marxism in ‘Mean Girls’ are first seen in the Cafeteria scene . Cady is being shown seating arrangements and is told where to and where not to sit. This to me was Classism because they are all seated a certain way based on who they are as individuals. She also likes Aaron Samuels, while he’s Regina’s ex boyfriend he is also the captain of the football team. Socially where she is does not permit her to date him because she is just seen as a math geek and a brain in a highschool environment that would be unacceptable. He would be expected to date someone more like a cheerleader or again Regina. This took me back to “Sara Cole” being seen with someone that was supposedly beneath you was ‘social suicide’
The idea that the boiguise class can be jeopardized by the working/middle class disproves the idea that socially we are meant to work as a group of one. This also means that this three class system that we have established can be questioned. Who is to say that someone one in the boiguise class can’t portray themselves as the opposite and vice versa. And if so would they want to or why would they want to?
Cady attempts to move up on the social chain but is only later used by Regina in order to save face. She is blamed for all the rumors that circulate around the school and becomes a social outcast. She goes from being one of the popular kids to being resented over night. Cady's story is a lot like many young girls who get caught up in popular crowds without realizing the consequences. Cady wanted to be socially accepted by her peers. This is normal, but realistically we can’t change who we are class wise. (An outside example being Black men with white wives, though they may become successful but even by marrying outside their race are still seen as the black guy with the white wife nothing is going to change their social standing or skin) She trued to do that by gaining acceptance from the popular kids and while she achieved it for a short time, everyone knows you can’t stay on top forever. Marx believed that one day there would be a social uprising among the classes. The Burn book was in a way the tool that caused that uprising. As I said earlier Cady is blamed for the circulation of rumors while this ruins her chance of ever being considered respectable by anyone the Burn book forces all the students in the school to come together and recognize that they are all the same in some way and are no different from each other regardless of social standing. Marx said that if we are born into one social class that is our social class and that is the end of the story but in the end in the case of "Mean Girls" it was proven that everyone was the same. Just a group of misguided people trying to tell everyone what to do because they didn’t want to follow rules themselves.
Regina, Karen and Gretchen are the most popular girls in the school. By being friends with them she becomes popular but loses herself in the process. Elements of Marxism in ‘Mean Girls’ are first seen in the Cafeteria scene . Cady is being shown seating arrangements and is told where to and where not to sit. This to me was Classism because they are all seated a certain way based on who they are as individuals. She also likes Aaron Samuels, while he’s Regina’s ex boyfriend he is also the captain of the football team. Socially where she is does not permit her to date him because she is just seen as a math geek and a brain in a highschool environment that would be unacceptable. He would be expected to date someone more like a cheerleader or again Regina. This took me back to “Sara Cole” being seen with someone that was supposedly beneath you was ‘social suicide’
The idea that the boiguise class can be jeopardized by the working/middle class disproves the idea that socially we are meant to work as a group of one. This also means that this three class system that we have established can be questioned. Who is to say that someone one in the boiguise class can’t portray themselves as the opposite and vice versa. And if so would they want to or why would they want to?
Cady attempts to move up on the social chain but is only later used by Regina in order to save face. She is blamed for all the rumors that circulate around the school and becomes a social outcast. She goes from being one of the popular kids to being resented over night. Cady's story is a lot like many young girls who get caught up in popular crowds without realizing the consequences. Cady wanted to be socially accepted by her peers. This is normal, but realistically we can’t change who we are class wise. (An outside example being Black men with white wives, though they may become successful but even by marrying outside their race are still seen as the black guy with the white wife nothing is going to change their social standing or skin) She trued to do that by gaining acceptance from the popular kids and while she achieved it for a short time, everyone knows you can’t stay on top forever. Marx believed that one day there would be a social uprising among the classes. The Burn book was in a way the tool that caused that uprising. As I said earlier Cady is blamed for the circulation of rumors while this ruins her chance of ever being considered respectable by anyone the Burn book forces all the students in the school to come together and recognize that they are all the same in some way and are no different from each other regardless of social standing. Marx said that if we are born into one social class that is our social class and that is the end of the story but in the end in the case of "Mean Girls" it was proven that everyone was the same. Just a group of misguided people trying to tell everyone what to do because they didn’t want to follow rules themselves.
Titanic
After seeing the movie "The Bicycle Thieves" the other day we were able to see how Marxism played a role throughout the movie. So I tried to think of another movie that I have seen where Marxism had occurred. One movie that came to my mind immediately was Titanic. Titanic was a movie that brought many different Marxism techniques together, and showed the viewer how the upper class is different from the lower class.
Titanic is a romantic tragedy that treated the upper class very different than the lower class. It brought two people together from opposite ends of the spectrum. They end up falling in love with many obstacles standing in there way, but to have it end all wrong. Both classes were treated very differently from where they were allowed to go on the boat, from where they were allowed to eat, and even who they were allowed to socialize with. The lower class was restricted to sleeping in the basement of the boat, while the upper class was sleeping in luxurious suites were they were served like royalty. I see a great irony that occurs in the movie it condemns capitalistic excess and celebrates the heroism and humanism of the underclass. The film also contradicts the anti Marxist stance that there is no class structure in America. Titanic also shows a striking and meaningful critique of American capitalism throughout the movie. Another example of Marxism shown through out the movie is when the ship is going down how the crew is taking off the women and children first and keep the lower class locked in the basement like their lives don't matter.
While many see Titanic as a Romantic tragedy many also see it as a Marxism piece. Through his movie there are many different story lines that portray many examples of Marxist behavior primarily between the upper and lower class.
Titanic is a romantic tragedy that treated the upper class very different than the lower class. It brought two people together from opposite ends of the spectrum. They end up falling in love with many obstacles standing in there way, but to have it end all wrong. Both classes were treated very differently from where they were allowed to go on the boat, from where they were allowed to eat, and even who they were allowed to socialize with. The lower class was restricted to sleeping in the basement of the boat, while the upper class was sleeping in luxurious suites were they were served like royalty. I see a great irony that occurs in the movie it condemns capitalistic excess and celebrates the heroism and humanism of the underclass. The film also contradicts the anti Marxist stance that there is no class structure in America. Titanic also shows a striking and meaningful critique of American capitalism throughout the movie. Another example of Marxism shown through out the movie is when the ship is going down how the crew is taking off the women and children first and keep the lower class locked in the basement like their lives don't matter.
While many see Titanic as a Romantic tragedy many also see it as a Marxism piece. Through his movie there are many different story lines that portray many examples of Marxist behavior primarily between the upper and lower class.
Fight Club
When thinking about a movie and relating it to Marxism I thought about one of my favorite movies, Fight Club. Marx predicts that the lower class will start a revolution against the upper class to end capitalism. Well in the movie, besides they’re being a weird twist about Ed Norton’s character he basically formed his own group. The group consisted of lower class individuals who participated in this club every week and then formed into a revolutionary group against the upper class. They were radicals who did their deeds by and means necessary. Basically doing things such as setting up big plans blowing up big company buildings to erase people’s debt. Their goal was to better average peoples lives because the main character was mad at the world and created this character within him self. He started revolutionary groups throughout the whole country. In the end he accepted him self and the revolution continued with the movie ending with the group blowing up big credit card infested buildings. Other than the whole revolutionary group, Brad Pitt’s character (Ed Norton’s other half) was a man who questioned life. I remember particularly one scene in the movie where I believe he went into an Asian deli, basically took the employee outside and put a gun to his head. He put the gun to his head, took his ID and asked him what he really wanted to do in his life, the man said art. Brad Pitt’s character basically told him screw the system where you have to work and follow what you really want to do. In a Marxist idea, we are stuck in our economic class which prevents us from doing what we want to do because we have to work to live, and that’s what we are “told” to do. We are prevented from moving up because of the class we were born into.
An analysis of ‘Pumpkin’ (Post 1)
Pumpkin is the story of a dismal sorority girl’s chanced meeting with a mentally retarded young man is sheltered by his mother. From the very beginning this seems like an odd match because they are obviously both from different social classes. Caroline Mc Duffy is your stereotypical snooty rich/upper class college student. While Pumpkin is both poor/lower class and only identified by a nickname Caroline has both ‘friends’ and a social circle. Caroline meets Pumpkin after her sorority decides that they are going to impress the council by attempting to raise more money than their rivals through working with kids in the Special Olympics. Though I haven’t seen the movie in quite some time I decided to do this one because it deals with social class and some aspects of Marxism. First theres the idea of Classism. Pumpkin is obviously slightly retarded but even with this he attempts to try and fit in, as does Caroline, obviously not happy with a Dudley Do right es boyfriend and fake sisters she mentors Pumpkin and discovers that there’s more to life than popularity. The two of them are from different classes which causes disarray for both parties. Especially Pumpkin’s overprotective mother who brands her as a ‘whore’ after she catches the two of them in his bedroom naked. Her boyfriend calls him a ‘retard’ and looks down on him immediately. She is branded as a social outcast because of her relationship with him. Her sorority sisters (the bourgeois) desert her. All at the cost of trying to find a place to belong. The whole Idea of classism is based on being catagorized based on social standing and income. Caroline comes from a rich family though the monetery aspect of who she is stays the same because she decides to associate herself with Pumpkin, she is some how dropped into another catagory. Though the idea of communism is based around working for a common goal the concept of Alienation comes into play also Marx defines alienation as "the worker, who is alienated or estranged from the products he creates, is also estranged from the process of production, which he regards only as a means of survival. Estranged from the production process, the worker is therefore also estranged from his or her own humanity, since the transformation of nature into useful objects is one of the fundamental facets of the human condition. The worker is thus alienated from his or her “species being”—from what it is to be human" Caroline is the estranged party. No matter how dedicated she was to the Phi Omegas all of this went out the window when she decided to go against traditional expectations of her peers. The extremeness of the situation is different because they are only a sorority group and not something as serious as a social group or some sort of company. The particular scene I wanted to focus on was when Pumkin comes to the formal ball and says "I came to dance with you Caroline I took a cab" He shows up against everything dispite what people may think. This defied what was socially acceptable. Marx beleives that people are doomed to remain in their social classes but this some ways disobeys the idea because he is somewhere he doesnt belong mingling with the upper class.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)