Blog Assignment 7: Film Theory Analysis of "City of God"

I chose to analyze the Brazilian/French film “City of God” through a Marxist and Marx-influenced framework. This movie is not only critically acclaimed, but tells a typically Marxist story of the struggling lower classes giving into the intended framework society has placed upon them (Gray, 2010). The film is set in the 1970’s and 1980’s in the “City of God” also known as Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. It tells the story of two young men, one of which avoids the typical life of a poor Brazilian, which is crime, and the other who is not as lucky (Meirelles, 2002). It is based on the true story and life experiences of one of the characters, and shows the brutal realities of the slum life in Rio (Meirelles, 2002).
Marx believed that human life was pretty well marked out for us (Gray, 2010). This life is based on capitalist society, which functions on economics (Gray, 2010). Marx did not like the world that he lived in, but he saw it for what it was, and saw how it functioned and wrote about it in a theoretical configuration. His world functioned through economics, and this is no different for the people in Brazil. These young men grew up in the poorest parts of Rio. They can do everything in their power to avoid the life that society intends them to live, but no matter what, they will, like many before them, end up living a life of crime in order to survive (Meirelles, 2002). This movie follows Marxist framework quite well, as it shows that there are particular orderings of society, a social hierarchy, which the upper classes especially want to maintain. Through ignoring the obvious fact that there are thousands of poor people on the outskirts of Rio, the rich remain rich, and the poor remain poor (Gray, 2010). Like Marx predicted, and like it is shown in this film, the people of the lower classes begin to accept their fate, and they even begin to use the same ideas the upper class used in order to try to oppress and exploit the weak (Meirelles, 2002). This is clearly shown throughout the movie, but particularly in the scene where the head drug dealer, L’il Ze, forces a young boy, who wants desperately to be part of the gang, to kill another young boy. L’il Ze knows deep down that children acting like this is not right, but he is trying to display his authority, like the rich do with the poor in their society, and he is showing his economic and social power by proving he could make anyone do whatever he wanted (Meirelles, 2002). His hunger for power and money is also shown in how he wants to control the cities drug trade. He knows that the only way of doing this is to kill the competition, and he does this without a worry (Meirelles, 2002).
Marx has obviously also influenced other people’s work, and this is seen through Althussers idea of interpellation (Gray, 2010). We can see that Althussers idea is very true in “City of God”, that an individual’s identity is definitely forged by society (Gray, 2010). Society in Rio de Janeiro has this hierarchical format, which in order to be maintained, needs to place certain individuals in these categories of higher to lower rankings. For these young men, they are looked at as though they are criminals from the day they are born, so the fact that the majority of them do become that way is not surprising, especially from a Marxist point of view (Meirelles, 2002). The societies ideologies form individual’s identities, but these so called ideologies are formed by society, media in particular. This is shown in the movie where the people of Rio think that the hood area is bad and that the people living there are bad, so they both become that way. Also, the only way that people come to realize the true issues lying at the core of this area is through media, through Rocket taking pictures and them being printed in the newspaper, and this was all by accident (Meirelles, 2002).
Marxist ideas are displayed in many forms throughout this movie. We see the class struggles that Marx furiously discussed in a lot of his papers, and we see that the societies ideologies frame the way that each individual’s life plays out (Gray, 2010).

Blog Assignment 6: The Importance of Radio

Radio in any setting would not be successful if it did not cater to the tastes of its listeners; it has to reflect the ideas of that community, and while it does that, it helps create the community as well. I will show this is true through two case studies, one centered on Australian aboriginal radio and the other in Fort McPherson in the Northwest Territories of Canada. Radio has a really strong importance in both of these communities, and through radio, the people of these communities have a sense of belonging and identity, as does the radio programming itself.
In the movie CBQM, we see how the CBQM radio station in Fort McPherson is organized. It is not only run by community members, but also most if not all the things talked about and played on the station are for that community (Allen, 2009). This radio station creates community by bringing them together. You can tell it is a very small town, and everyone really relies on the radio for guidance on community information, including religious information, police announcements, birthday announcements, and even telling one person to call another, just to list off a few things (Allen, 2009). The radio station is a way for the members of the community to feel a sense of belonging; they are included in everything that is going on, even though they are sitting at home. On the other hand, the community really forms how the radio is formed, and a perfect example of this is when the weather starts to change and the days will be longer, you can tell there is extreme excitement in the community at this time, and something as little as weather to most people, is very important in this Northwest Territories community (Allen, 2009). This station is central to the community, and without the community the radio station would not exist, so they work together to form a relationship that is necessary for both sides. I think especially since this community is so small, that CBQM is so essential as it is their communities hub for information of all forms, it is a way to make sure people are safe, like letting them know about a wolf sighting, and a way to keep them up to date on political information, like with the chief informing them about concerns in the community (Allen, 2009). This radio station truly reflects this community’s interests and concerns, and is a great example of how radio can be so central to the meaning of a group.
The other case study is from Australia. It is a little different as it is on a larger scale than the CBQM example. Fisher talks about how there are many radio stations that try to reach aboriginal communities across Australia, and it is sort of a way of bringing them together, even though they are really several kilometers apart (Fisher, 2009). Like in the Fort McPherson case, these radio stations are a way to bring the aboriginal community and kin groups together, the stations are a venue of communication and help create a better sense of community identity and togetherness that otherwise would not exist across such a wide space (Fisher, 2009). Kin talk to each other through the radio, which really reflects the importance of kinship to these people (Fisher, 2009). This case study is a little different though, as it was the community itself that really fought for the station to start, so it definitely created the nature of the radio in that sense. Also, the community uses the station as a way to communicate with their families, like on CBQM, but also to play songs for family members and friends who are in prison (Fisher, 2009).
Both of these case studies are very similar, but have their distinct community characteristics. Although their scales are different, both radio programs create a tie for these aboriginal communities to feel a sense of community and togetherness, in situations that would not necessarily happen if the radio stations did not exist. The radio stations definitely cater to their listeners, and they play the music that that communities want and talk about the issues that concern these communities the most.

Blog Assignment 5: The Acceptability of Remediation

Remediation is an interesting topic, as it has become so common for most media to be recreated in some manner. The majority of remediation today is a form of tribute to the original, and a way for anyone to have their ten minutes in the spotlight, especially where youtube is concerned. I am going to write about two Saturday Night Lives skits that are recreations of previous media and how both can be seen as mocking the original, but how due to the content one is more acceptable in terms of recreation than the other. I think that there is a large gray area when it comes to acceptable and unacceptable media recreation, as some people tend to be a little more sensitive to certain topics than others. There are some topics that remain untouched, as we know that it would be unacceptable to recreate or mock them, like 9/11 for instance, but there are other circumstances where we feel the need to make fun of certain situations, like the most current mockery of Charlie Sheen interviews. It also depends on location, as in the United States and Canada I believe it is way more socially acceptable to reuse and recreate media, than in other countries. Like we see in Novak’s article, there are some culturally significant situations where a lighthearted recreation can be taken as racist and insulting (Novak, 2010). We really can never know for sure if a reuse will be accepted or not, but thinking about the original piece of media and the meaning behind it is very necessary to avoid conflicts like Novak describes (Novak, 2010). I think it comes down to timing and topic when we characterize where reuse of media is acceptable or not. When talking about racial, gendered, or political topics, there are always going to be people who find the new media unacceptable, where others find it entertaining.
Saturday Night Live, more than any other media outlet, is known for its parodies of major media events in the world. One very funny and famous one is of the “Single Ladies” video by Beyonce. Beyonce, along with SNL cast members and Justin Timberlake, recreated her video, but instead of her usual female backup dancers, Timberlake and a couple other male SNL cast members dressed up in leotards and danced alongside Beyonce. This, for I think most people watching it, is a great example of how media can be recreated acceptably and for much comic relief. Beyonce herself was in the recreation, which added to its hilarity as she does exactly what she did in the original music video, but now alongside men in leotards. Just changing the backup dancers changed the entire idea of the video, especially as it is named “Single Ladies”. Maybe the only unacceptable part of the video could be the men in tight leotards and lack of good dance moves, but I find it difficult to think anyone would find this insulting (Wonderpetpower, 2008).
The other SNL video is a parody of Sarah Palin’s interview with Katie Couric. Although from my point of view, this video is very much acceptable, I do think that to some it could be seen as the opposite. Politics especially are a sensitive topic, and making fun of a vice-presidential candidate, to some, is seen as disrespectful and unacceptable. I think from a Republican perspective parodying Palin’s interview is detrimental to their campaign, and a lot of media outlets were making fun of Sarah Palin during the 2008 election. I can see many from Alaska also finding the parodies of Palin as insulting, as not in this video, but in other circumstances many poked fun at Palin’s red neck-like actions, due to her being from Alaska. I would hope that people realize that it is a joke, and not harm is meant in these videos, but to some politics is a very serious topic, and it is not acceptable to reuse the original media events just for entertainments purposes (Bipinsen, 2008).
There are many other circumstances where reuse can be seen as unacceptable, like I said though; it is a large gray area, as it depends on where you are and the person who is watching the reuse to decide what is appropriate and what is not.