Pre-class 10/30 Blog--RS

Hebdige brings up many of the points discussed by theorists we have discussed in class this semester such as Barthes, Marx, and Althusser and ties their ideas all together in a discourse about ideology and hegemony. He mentions that Roland Barthes helped reveal how arbitrary the system of language is, especially if used as an attempt to reinforce and maintain class differences.  He comments on the relative fragility of this system in becoming myth one day.

This reminds me of our class discussion on Tuesday, in which I mentioned how ideologies related to gender affect language use between men and women. For example, men tend to use more commanding, concrete, and demanding language, which is also reflected by their dominative position and tendencies in society. Women on the other hand, tend to use more language that is uncertain, polite, and less direct. A woman might say more terms related to "may, can, if, etc" whereas a man might tend to use more words such as "I will, I'm going to, I am, etc." Therefore, this language that is more direct and straightforward may result in more likelihood of promotions, getting what one asks for, not being taken advantage of, etc. This is one subtle way in which ideology and its relationship to language has taken hold and established this hegemony. Hebdige also notes that a struggle between discourses within ideology is always with a struggle with signs, which is relevant in this instance.

Hebdige brings up this idea of subcultures and the cultural elite with his words. He comments on the notion of "reading society" being a skill that comes with being cultured and belongs to the upper wealthier classes. This notion has become more deconstructed in our current age I think, and has proven to be an issue, especially within liberal or Democrats. The "Right" in particular has used this as an offensive tactic by accusing the "Left" as being elitist and stuck up. It has even become an accusation to be part of the educated. Educated symbolizes privilege, and those who sit in their figurative glass castles of academia can seem to be part of a type of cultural elite that excludes those on the Right. Although there has recently become more notice of hegemonic differences, certain sides have also utilized this to their advantage to engage in a sort of "cultural warfare" as some say.


On my honor, I have not given, nor received, nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this work. -Renee Sang

Post Class Blog/ Lyotard+Habermas

In response to Jurgen Habermas's Modernity: An Incomplete Project, Jean Francis Lyotard writes Answering the Question: What is Modernity. Lyotard questions Habermas's argument that modernity is an incomplete project. Lyotard takes on the idea of realism, writing that realism "always stands somewhere between academicism and kitsch." He argues that we exist in a post era of modernity that demands a new way of representation and thought. Lyotard argues that the avant-garde has ended the idea of the singular meta-narrative and creates endless meta-narratives- especially within the culture of art. Today, the production and exhibition of art is still inaccessible to a large sector of the public. The notion of "high" art and "low" art is still prominent creating a large divide in understanding and even larger confusion. Likewise, the increased price points for contemporary works has created a large gap in the representation of artwork in now highlight shows featuring celebrity endorsements like Art Basel.

9/15 Post Class Blog

While reading "The Emergent Rules," I had a hard time connecting to what Jenck's wrote about postmodern architecture. It was not until I reflected on my own experiences in relation to the text, could I understand. This summer I worked at the Frelinghuysen Morris House and Studio in Lenox, Massachusetts. The studio was finished in 1930  and the home was built onto in 1941 in the styles of modern and midcentury modern styles. The building is built in the Bauhaus and international style- clean lines and lack of color and ornamentation. The exterior of the building has remained unchanged since completion. There has been talk about an addition of a new building near the home to be the reception center for visitors. If the museum/historic home were to add a portion to the building that was contemporary in style then there would be the eclecticism of Postmodern architecture. The museum would bring together the old and the new (dualism) eclectically. This type of style is present at the Louvre complex through the combination of contemporary and French Renaissance architectures.

Post Class Blog 10/29

Karl Marx theorized how Western society functions according to class structures. He said that the structure involved all of society and was acted as a rule. It included forms of government rules and also ideological rules like religion and law. The structure benefits the people (bourgeoisie) in power of material-the ruling class has economic power and intellectual power over society. In  American materialistic society, words like "fast, new, upward, many, and active" are positive because they are associated with the increase in capital. 

Althusser expands on Marx's theory by determining how ideology functions in society. He writes that ideology is broken down into two parts. The first is the ideological state apparatus (ISA). ISA's include: religion, education, family, legal, political, union, media, and culture ideologies. ISA's are imaginary places of creating thought. For example, family, church, and school all are methods of control of behavior. Repercussions occur when an individual does not follow the systems of thought. ISA's prevalent in every aspect of society and it is impossible to separate oneself from their reach. 

The second are called (Repressive) state apparatuses. RSA's are tangible areas of ideology. For example, government, police force, army, administration, court and prisons are agencies of the state apparatus. Althusser says that  RSA's different from ISA'S because they use direct violence. The RSA can have direct access into the private lives of people. For example, the police can pull over cars and enter homes. Althusser believes that RSA's targets the working class over the ruling class because of the lack of power. He believes that the state apparatus targets the working class due to their vulnerabilities. RSA's use force and ISA's need the acceptance of the public. 

Post class 10/24 Blog

Although I have never been an ultra Disney enthusiast or fanatic (e.g. the people who have seen every Disney movie and have matching family Disney shirts and dress up as Disney characters religiously let's say), I do enjoy the occasional movie or trip to the theme park. I have always been skeptical of any major corporation, even (or especially) if they have as strong of a public image as Disney. That being said, after discussing Eco and Dorfman in class, I had a bit more tangible proof as to Disney's mastery of deception.

Relatively no one can deny that every child has based their fantasies, hope, and dreams upon Disney. However, Disney has infiltrated this world so deeply, that they have come to set the standard for what is moral, pure, and good in the world. Why shouldn't our children gain their aspirations from Disney, since they spread such messages of hope, joy, and dreaminess? It seems that only the "crazy" or extremely conservative parents who are afraid of their children worshipping these cultish, fantasy, unholy figures don't fall into this category. I think this is simply another example that one can learn to be wary of anything widely accepted or considered popular opinion (within reason/limit).

Although I agree with Eco and Dorfman on many accounts, I still fail to see an alternative to this "Disneyfication of reality" besides being critical. Although I have always held a degree of skepticism to the purity of Disney's intentions in the back of my mind, I still watch (and sometimes enjoy) the movies, go to the theme park, celebrate their charity, etc. As mentioned in my last blog about Eco and Dorfman, I agree with many of the points, but this reading seems to be highly critical (naturally) without making me feel activated. Perhaps this is due to my already existing skepticism of Disney, and these readings are meant for those completely disillusioned or asleep of Disney's capitalistic intentions. However, I will likely still go to the theme parks, attend the movie showings, allow my kids to be involved with the franchise, etc. As with many of the critical readings I have come across in my past, I feel enlightened but not necessarily engaged to do something. They make notable points, but I fail to see any viable "solutions" (this is perhaps a dangerous word as well) or things that I should do but maintain my healthy skepticism. If Disney is spreading messages to children to serve their own capital interests, what should we surround our children with instead (especially since Disney is nearly unavoidable in this day and age)?

On my honor, I have not given, nor received, nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this work. -Renee Sang

Pre-class 10/23 blog-Renee Sang

In the introduction to Ideology, it is simply stated that "every sign is ideological" (p. 33). Ideology has become impossibly entangled with politics and symbolizes power. In order to maintain power in our current political economy (not necessarily always the government), control of ideas and thought is crucial. Marx and Engels also touch on this concept.

I think this can also relate to our last class discussion of Zizek's idea of the spectacle. Zizek is saying that the image of something can create a spectacular effect that captures our fear and awe. This is one way in which terrorism has more effectively been able to disseminate fear from afar. In this digital and social media age, a physical act does not even need to be completed by the group to be "effective." The group can simply rely on the easy spread of information and take credit for everyday occurrences of violence or havoc to spread their influence.

The author in this section of ideology is also stating that all signs are ingrained with ideas tied to power systems, and all things are also ingrained with signs that contain these associations. Especially in modern society, control of thought and ideas is key to obtaining power, and it can be most effectively maintained if it becomes unconscious as the author notes. This naturalizing process can also be known as hegemony. The author therefore makes a good point by likening ideology to "a gigantic masquerade" (p. 34). 

I agree with the author's point that "every sign is ideological," and in fact this quote gives me some perspective on the definition and role of ideology. All things are engrained with associations, messages, and implications that are also influenced by systems and sources of power. It's important perhaps to recognize this dynamic is the reason why we strive for a critical lens in Critical Media and Cultural Studies.


Noted quotes/notes:

• "Every sign is ideological" p. 33
• ideology is "so deeply bound up with politics, domination, and issues of power" p. 33
• Marx and Engels working in the context where control of ideas isn't necessarily as significant to maintaining power
• social control of thought now is of importance for power and politics p. 33
• ideology ingrained with systems of power
• Neo-classicism 
• Intellectual and material control =ultimate power/supreme control
• Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs)

On my honor, I have not given, nor received, nor witnessed any unauthorized assistance on this work. -Renee Sang

Pre Class Blog 10/23

I think that one of Mark Poster’s main points about virtual reality is related to the multiple realities that are created, and that we experience with the internet and virtual reality in society, he says, “The effect of new media such as the Internet and virtual reality, then is to multiply the kinds of "realities" one encounters in society” (446). As reality is considered a state of existence, and we are able to exist through online personas, it makes sense that we can have realities that are virtual. So, Poster is saying that we can use the internet and virtual reality to become someone else, perhaps of a different gender and age, we can even have an entire life and create new cultures this way. However, Poster is saying that this is the creation of a new, virtual reality, even though it may resemble every day, it is fiction, and considered a separate reality. Poster is saying that due to technology, we are no longer limited to our one reality, we are able to create and experience multiple realities. An example of a virtual reality is the game, Sims. In the game, you can create a character or whatever age, gender, hair color, body type, etc. and name them whatever you want. This can be as similar or different as your everyday reality as you want it to be. Through your role as a Sims character, you are able to live out a life completely separate, and become immersed in Sims’ culture. So, by playing in the Sims’ reality, and experiencing non-virtual reality, you have already encountered two forms of reality, and thanks to technology this can happen in a number of different ways, so that we experience many different realities in society. Reality becomes multivalent, as the number of realities increase exponentially. I think that this can be related to previous theorists, like how Lyotard argues that postmodernity fractured the grand narratives of modernity into postmodern micro narratives, the totality of reality has disappeared and technology has fractured reality into many realities, which I think is the next big step in contemporary culture.