Back to week 10...

For week ten I chose to watch films by Maya Deren. Now, I am not a film student, nor did I have any prior experience with her work. And perhaps I have a biased due to my own field of study, but I believe most everything made can have a "personal style" implemented. We know that there are, of course, big organizations that are known for producing a certain "style" and that is what they in turn sell (much like Disney). But, on a smaller scale, for instance, with any independent films, artists are not running on the bill of large corporations. They have a message to tell and no one to tell them how to make it. Why would they waste an opportunity to be unique unless mimicry in some way conveyed their story?
I have no knowledge of any particular film artists similar to Maya Deren. I watched her pieces "Meshes of the Afternoon", "Witch's Cradle", and "The Private Life of a Cat", and again, if you ask me I would insist that she has a very distinctive style. Even for "The Private Life of a Cat", consisting of a rather different message from the other two, I believe her fingerprint is present. The way the cats are documented to me is very dreamlike. There is no sound, only your mind to interpret whatever words flash on the screen, or any bit of imagery. There is a certain element in her message therefore that only she could understand and reproduce to the "Maya Deren" style. And that style, I believe is her message and its presentation. Both "Witch's Cradle" and "Meshes of the Afternoon" have a very surreal atmosphere that have an obvious and deep context. Once again, it's all about the imagery and symbolism hidden in the composition that Maya Deren uses to relay her intentions.

Trump "Inventory"!

First thing I got when I found this image was "alpha male appeal". No, really, those were the words right on the article. Trump's playing it all out cool. He's confident and cares little about what others will throw at him. And he knows he's expected NOT to back down. From a supporter's standpoint this image might imply those expectations. "Everything is all right. We got this, guys. We're better than the rest." That's what I'm getting. For those of us against Trump, we just see a guy who's full of himself!
But on neutral ground once more, this image tells us that Trump is a no-nonsense kind of person who won't cover up his intentions with formalities. Again, he's confident in everything that he is doing and will ignore the opposition regardless.

My answer to our question about last week's play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead is really not much different from what was discussed in class. I agree that it is very much a show about Drama and perspective. It is a symbolic reflection, a self aware, or perhaps far from a self aware experience. We see these contradictions between the performers and Rosencrants and Guildenstern. In my opinion, the two main characters (oddly enough side characters in the original Hamlet) are like parts of the subconscious competing within a single mind. And on our other hand we have the actors of which seem eerily aware of their situation. Somehow the performers have broken the binds of their so called "roles" through a hyperawareness of their own story. Even when Rosencrants and Guildenstern are put to their deaths they cannot seem to beak free of their own minds. To me this emulates how the subconscious cannot control itself, or be any more than exactly what it is, the subconscious. On a larger scale it could be satire on certain kinds of individuals. Several times in the play, either Rosencrants, or Guildenstern stop to contemplate the meaning of death. They construct the illusion for themselves that they are being profound and they catch themselves up in all of the wrong details. But, perhaps they cannot help it, and that could be precisely what the play means in demonstrating the lives of two minor characters. They are throwaway souls, and in that case have no choice of escape. The notion could be seen as a sort of way to break the fourth wall, which, Shakespeare often did in his plays.    

I managed to read through two and a half of the provided short stories for today, completing both "Hitting Budapest" and "Whites". Being of mostly white European decent, all of these stories have been written from perspectives that would not be considered my own. But the point of "listening" without necessarily relating was brought up. That is an idea that is very personal to me because of my belief in having sympathy for other human beings. Though I cannot physically reach empathy for the characters in these stories I have tried my best to understand their messages. You may or may not agree that there are important moral lessons packed with these writings. Perhaps they are aimed at particular audiences to express the existences of different worlds on a parallel course. I would agree that this is the very case, especially for myself coming from a culture where I am often not exposed to these sorts of characters. It is eye opening in a way I feel should be more frequent.

I'm choosing "Whites" to analyze for ethos. There is a heavy feeling of struggle detailed about Japanese woman in America. I feel as if the story makes a point of their mistreatment, longing, and will to continue despite, all as specific elements. In this case its ethos would be an idea that this particular demographic has been pushed into a harsh world created for them by people of white backgrounds, particularly men. Throughout the story men in particular are described as demanding and dominant. They are considered liars, the women their victims, and it is made worse by white men who use the women for their own desires because they believe they can easily take advantage of them. The ideas of "home" and "childhood" appear to be the most cherished, as described in the end by the narrator who makes these memories out to be better than their current situation. And yet still, a woman's independence and will to carry on are both praised as demonstrated in scenes between women who leave their husbands and seek other women for advice.

There is indication of a voice used in this story. Though it covers a broad subject, it is still a voice relatable to a certain group of people. It speaks for multiple people, in this case, but is still present as being a certain "individual" with a particular background. By placing in specific contexts and clues it is easy to get the feeling that narrator "knows what they are talking about".

Regarding the characters, they are connected to their world as opposing forces. There is the ruling class, namely the white men, and the quiet, working class, the female Japanese immigrants to America. The ruling class is portrayed as not recognizing, or mentioning what hardships that they place on these women, though they may, or may not be aware of it.

            I shall use “Even the Queen” as my source of influence for this next passage. I mentioned that it took a satirical look upon an opposing viewpoint. In particular I believe it stands as support to the idea that sisterhood can be used to resist patriarchy. Even so, I feel that either viewpoint in the story acts as its own kind of “sisterhood”. On one side, the main character and her family, though often in disagreement, gather together to change her daughter’s mind. And yet, that opinion which the daughter had developed still came from another group of women, all who were obligated to stand up for their ideals.

            In the end, either side makes independent decisions. It comes down for these characters to a matter of whether or not they think a woman’s natural cycles signify her true freedom. In either case, Perdita was the subject of change and her final choice was determined by personal opinion. In the end she still had the privilege to do what she wanted, aside from social oppressions from the family. Based on her mother’s attitude, if she had not changed her mind there may have very well been nothing her family could have done to stop her.

            On one hand a group of women have fought for her to join their side and join a “natural” course, while on the other hand, her family, in a more literal sense, her sisters, fought for her well being in a different aspect. Once again, it was summed up by personal opinion in the end.

I have read “Girl” on several occasions, both for classes like this, and once on my own volition. As for the other stories, they were new to me. I have mentioned that I try my best to take a neutral standpoint about almost any issue I see, though I am only human and it is quite impossible not to be moved at all, or be uninfluenced. When it comes down to it, I’d just like the best for everyone. But I suppose this is beside the point for our most recent discussions.

If I have an opinion it is that there are still lessons in this world to learn and though it may not be my job to be loud and expressive just yet, those who take the opportunity, or have a natural talent with voice are important people. Even if an agreement cannot be reached I believe it is necessary to at least listen to others, and with hope, have the same favor returned.

Reading stories like “Girl”, “Even the Queen”, and “The Yellow Wallpaper” which all take obvious, and perhaps different standpoints due to certain backgrounds, of course, is meant to invoke thought. My point is that regardless of relating to these positions, they are highly representative of demographics that exist no matter what. In particular, stories like “Even the Queen” I feel do a proficient job of expressing multiple views, being of course, two different womanly perspectives on natural cycles. It is interesting to see how either side claims to be “freedom”, though it is apparent that the writing is a satirical statement in favor of one side over the other. That, I would say, proves the necessity for observation and acceptance. If I may take the quote from the story: “A free society has to be based on respecting others’ opinions and leaving each other alone.”

I only have a simple opinion on our discussion in regards to Wes Anderson’s inspiration from Zweig. I think it’s a perfectly valid project, simply because as artist it is important to learn and reflect upon the work of others. I have no issue in bringing back old stories to retell, granted if the media is suiting.

Of course, there is a fine line between being inspired and just flat out copying what you see. As an artist it is impossible to learn and shape yourself without first emulating that which inspires you. This is a common artistic technique, what, writing “love letters” to and fro within a community. In my opinion a sign of properly handled influence comes from how influence is integrated. There must be enough of a twist.

A piece must both make its influences obvious, and yet take much from its creator in presentation. But there is also, at least for me, and extent to the “magic”. The first time a story is retold it has its biggest chance to provide a nostalgia factor. Though in recent media, its obvious that artists keep trying to hang on to this aspect. They’re working off of a formula, perhaps along the lines of “Hey, the people already like this story, why bother to come up with anything else?”. Of course, this relies on the existence of storyverses in popular culture.

Fan bases make these things huge. And, yes, there are those who do really enjoy certain worlds and stories, and frankly don’t mind hearing their favorite tales over and over. But for me, that gets old fast. At some point it loses it’s inspirational aspects and simply becomes copying, money preying, a drag.

Directly, I suppose I’m just being bitter about the mass of super hero movies, or fantasy, or action movies using the same characters over and over. But that’s just my opinion. I don’t want to see another King Kong or Godzilla movie. But, I do not in the least see Wes Anderson’s work amongst the same category. I believe he is taking from a quieter source, one that is little looked upon, and is thus healthy for popular culture. And I bet he has no intentions of milking his source dry. In this case, I applaud him.