Analysis #5 Poststructuralism and Postmodernism

Analysis of the open mic nights, controversial issues of voice vs. written word by way of Derrida and others from the post structuralism and postmodernism theory

It would be very useful if Jacques Derrida went to a poetry reading, if he had any interest in it at all, because he would be able to experience how reading off of a page more often than not, brings a work alive rather than dulling it. Many times, the spoken word is more powerful than written, due to the ability to control fluctuation in the rhythm and pronunciation, the levels of volume and tone, and other things like body language. Most often, we find that people, especially in these days, are visually wired, and have short attention spans. But with this in mind, we see that Derrida has a good point. However, writers of poetry and lovers of words would obviously say the opposite. That there is room to fight for the other side, that the written word does not compare, because, like Sartre would say, the meaning ends in the reader. Because of this, there are more avenues that one piece's interpretation can go down, rather than the one presented to us, already decoded through biased opinions and persuasion of rhetoric.
Derrida says that writing is a fall from the full presence of speech. That it is only a derivative. Someone like Donald M. Bahr would agree, in his article on transferring Native American oral poetry to the page. This is ingrained in their culture. But we must not underestimate the power of our minds to read the written word as if it were spoken, and the opportunity to have no voice but our own interpret its value.



Works Cited

Bahr, Donald M. Reading the Voice: Native American Oral Poetry on the Written

Page. Wicazo SA review: A Journal of Native American Studies 15.2 (2000) 153-157.

Web. 17 May. 2011. .

Analysis # 3 Reader-Response

Reader-Response theory using the "text" of Salvidor Dali himself and his paintings such as this, and Jean-Paul Sartre's theories

In art pieces, Sartre says "if they come from the depths of our heart, we will never find anything but ourselves in it. Though entitled "Autumn Cannibalism," at first glance we wouldn't think of these things. After staring at this picture without the title, it would be assumed that most people wouldn't think of cannibalism off the cuff. They might see arms, faces, some sort of human characteristics melded together with the environment and random objects. But as Sartre talks about the author, or in this case to draw a parallel, the artist, he says he does not see the words or the work as the reader or viewer does, since he knows them before writing, or painting them. He only "projects." He says it is directed creation. The text "does not serve my freedom, it requires it," he says.
For Dali, he had many endeavors and an eccentric personality. He had made a collection of jewels, and in speaking about one, said himself, Dalí himself commented that "Without an audience, without the presence of spectators, these jewels would not fulfill the function for which they came into being. The viewer, then, is the ultimate artist." In this way, he completely would agree with Sartre, who believes the meaning ends in the reader.
While many would look upon this painting and draw their own meaning from it, not many would think of cannibalism, or hopefully not, which shows that Dali had a strange, unique mind that only "projected" an instigator of interpretation, regardless of his inspiration or thoughts at the time. In this way, "art exists as fact when it is seen," not before.

Analysis #6

Just Ain't Right
Analysis on Feminism and Gender Studies through Genesis and the show Mad Men

It is interesting to see that Beauvoir starts out by bringing up the fact that people have discussed if women exist. Beauvoir says that we have all the proof; ovaries and such. She says "In truth, to go for a walk with one’s eyes open is enough to demonstrate that humanity is divided into two classes of individuals whose clothes, faces, bodies, smiles, gaits, interests, and occupations are manifestly different. Perhaps these differences are superficial, perhaps they are destined to disappear. What is certain is that they do most obviously exist" (Beauvoir).
And on to the question of what a woman is. This topic, as she says, was not easily written about with all the controversy and exhaustion. But I would like to highlight her statement that leads back to Adam and Eve. She says that "St Thomas for his part pronounced woman to be an ‘imperfect man’, an ‘incidental’ being. This is symbolised in Genesis where Eve is depicted as made from what Bossuet called ‘a supernumerary bone’ of Adam." Whereas most people cannot fathom that their equality be muted in any way, shape, or form, Genesis highlights the point that Eve was made from Adam's rib, and created as a helpmate for what symbolizes the head of a body, Eve symbolizing the body, which symbolizes the church, which we all know is a part of the head, and yet the head, holding everything together (representing Christ) is the Alpha and Omega, not the body. And so we have a text to consider with the feminist theories today. Her quote from Benda confirms this idea, that "'the body of man makes sense in itself quite apart from that of woman, whereas the latter seems wanting in significance by itself ... Man can think of himself without woman. She cannot think of herself without man.’"

Taking the show Mad Men for example, we see how women are discriminated and used, looked down upon and trying to be controlled. However, we see that man, as Beauvoir brings up, sees women as sex, and thus, this notion is brought into play as the men give way, appreciate, and extend grace, seemingly only for this reason, throwing the women into turmoil and confusion, but thus, gaining more confidence to be equal, socially, and in the work place. Now, we see that this is a place where the "other" is full blown. Eve was just as important as Adam, yet they had different roles. What we see today, is imperfection in God's perfection through these two beings, who even to this day, are continually struggling to be happy, just as feminists see that things just aren't the way it should be. And they are right. But then, what better to strive for God's perfection? Gaining a real sense of love, and therefore going about our daily lives with respect, concern, and understanding of the other gender, bringing relationships together not apart? Being ourselves in our specific roles as individuals and not putting men or women in a box?

Analysis # 7 Ethnicity Studies

Black Hair, Blonde Masks
Analysis on Ethnicity studies through cross cultural influences of America on Japanese fashion and maybe more

"The white man is sealed in his whiteness. The black man in his blackness"(9). Though Fanon Frantz brings out this concept in "Black Skin, White Masks, he reveals that the widely held, subconscious wrench that is thrown in is that "for the black man there is only one destiny. And it is white" (10) It is the ultimate place that he saw a certain class of black people drawing their visions from, their day to day goals and instillations of values for their children. Today we see a parallel, in the area of America still being a desirable place, the land of the free and better education; a place where people from all over the world want to reproduce the Hollywood style and glamor. Whereas Langston Hughes stands for identifying one's self not as a poet, but a black poet. Because he says "it is the duty of the younger Negro artist, if he accepts any duties at all from outsiders, to change through the force of his art that old whispering "I want to be white," hidden in the aspirations of his people, to "Why should I want to be white? I am a Negro- and beautiful! (1316).
So in this case, of the modern Japanese girls who bleach their hair and make their skin bronzed, we are not just dealing with fashion, but a desire to be like Americans in many other ways. From the older, more traditional generation, we see a new generation, adapting the culture and lifestyle of Americans. Langston Hughes would say that these girls, called gangurus, are Japanese, not American, and to be all that you are inside, not trying to conform to some idealistic lifestyle or different way of living than what they are used to for the sake of envy or what people will think of them. To hold on to your own culture and accept who you really are. I would like to think it is only for reasons of fashion, but you never know.

Works Cited

Hughes, Langston "The Negro Artist and the Racial Mountain." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: Norton, 2001. 1313-317. Print.

Fanon, Frantz, Black Skin, White Masks. Trans. by Charles Lam Markmann. London: Pluto, 1986.

Analysis #4 Marxist Theory

Analyzing the idealistic American "culture" of the 1950's and surrounding ties by way of Ross and Marxist theory

I think Ross’ ideas are very relavent to today’s society. We deal with a world that is constantly throwing ideologies at us. Even though we know a lot of them aren’t true, we will still take that placebo to “lose weight and feel great” or try and handle circumstances as simply and effectively as shown in an episode of “Family Ties.” For Ross, “all you have is ideologies,” as if there is a wall of haze between the text and the reader, always there to change the truth. I associated this with believing people have rose colored eyes, permanently seeing their world through an idealistic filter. Ross says there is a false relationship we have with the world around us. I think that it is definitely dangerous to be looking around wishing and hoping for things that aren’t practical to you.
For example, envying someone that has a great job, yet your talents are elsewhere, having nothing to do with the work that this particular person does day in and day out. As she has a smile on her face due to the joy it brings her to walk our her own talent, as you are trying to follow her exact footprints to catch that happiness, so to speak, your smiles are leaving you. Another thought is pictures. Some pictures, like the ones in frames you buy at the store, containing smiles that are ready to burst through the page at you and are lathered with content happy families can be misleading. The purchaser might even buy that frame because they felt nice looking at it, and somewhere deep down wished they had a family like that. Taking a step back, how does she know they don’t get into arguments, and why is she wrapping up their whole family life into one small picture; one small joyous moment? This is an ideology we all fall into, according to what we desire.

Marxist Theory

This topic I find to be highly important. Deception, manipulation, secrecy, power, greed and selfishness all play in to the superstructures leading into religion, politics and cultures as a gateway for some key figures, such as the owner of a large company, to manipulate the tokens on the game board of their system.
As we discussed in class, something as seemingly simple as a drink we buy at Starbucks is really not that simple at all due to the labor that different categories of work forces put into it. There is the beans, which at first had to have a place to grow, and harvest, and package, and ship, and commute, and grind, and steep, and pour into your cup. This is just the bean trail. There is a “vast totality of labor” within the process. The problems we hear about are working conditions and payment to the hard labor workers out in Africa, for example. Or the bottom of the barrel office workers to a major corporation, under payed and taken advantage of, so that they receive just enough to live on, all because of numbers. All because the owner couldn’t bear to lose one cent over a less thought about process that they could have extracted more labor from, which is all the worker is to this owner; labor. It’s what he buys from them. He is a capitalist, or rather, the mother was the first capitalist; the first proletariat.

Weekly Blog #7 Phenomenology and Reader-Response Theory

Where meaning lies is a crucial question. We can theorize all day long, but if we don’t know when to stop; where it ends, what conclusion to come to and rest the brainstorming, what is the point? That is why these philosophers had to come up with some idea of where to find the truth. For Jean-Paul Sartre, the meaning ends in the reader. When these eyes hit the page, I agree that they start hypothesizing, forming opinions, testing, all the material that is in front of him and as other critics say, we are continually critiquing and judging everything that is around us and that as humans, this is impossible to get away from therefore, we conclude at the end of the passage or whatever it is that we are reading, where we stand. For Sartre, this is where the meaning rests.
This is the purpose of the literature, as a kick start to a brain’s formation of thought processes. To ignite the continual interpretation through the freedom that exists within it as he says, “in short, reading is directed creation… the book does not serve my freedom, it requires it.” In other words, we must have freedom in order for the meaning to exist. For Kant, art exists as fact and then it is seen. But for Sartre, art exists as fact when it is seen. The difference is that Kant believes things exist whether there is someone there to perceive it or not. Sartre believes that those eyes, that mind to perceive the thing actually brings it to existence.

Weekly Blog #6 Psychoanalysis

While I have heard about Freud endless times, I have not studied Lacan, but found his ideas very interesting, and speaking of mirrors, it mirrored some things I have seen in my life. The mirror stage in which there is an abstraction of self, sets a precedent of defining you from a perception of you. Now, the image in the mirror is only a signifier. It is not the real thing, or person.
This child is desiring to fulfill the mother’s desires, as Lacan says, and goes through a stage of desiring what others desire. This was the most interesting part to me because I found that it not only in child development, but lasts throughout lifetime. Whereas there are advantages and disadvantages, it is a very human characteristic varying in degrees due to personality type. To want to please others takes a desire to fulfill their needs as best possible. To know those needs best, we sometimes take on too much, trying to understand them so much that we are now in agreement, and we too desire their desires. While compassionate at the source, it is tricky at the end because we no longer are sure of what we, as individuals, desire apart from them. This is why we take the saying, “just be yourself” into account, yet we know most of the time it is inevitable to be formfitting to the person across the table, especially on a first date.

Weekly Blog #5 Structuralism and Semiotics

Ferdinand Saussure talks about the relation of signs, composed of the signifier and the signified. When we look at different magazine ads, for example, we not only see, but we sense, due to our relation from the signifier. It is safe to say that every advertiser is involved in the art of this technique. Commercializing things is not as simple as showing a product, but is as difficult as trying to evoke some part of you, the viewer, that relates to a subject in the advertisement in which you decide it would be best to buy their product. While everyone is different, we can assume that the media is doing a good job of molding the general population’s desires, so that all they have to do is look to the popular desires and work with those to try to meet their usually impractical needs. But through persuading someone that they need this product or else they won’t be successful, or smart, or happy, or healthy, we have successfully slightly been brainwashed in order for a company to raise their revenue.
As signs can be used for good or evil in this way, we see that they are what evokes meaning in to our lives. If we pass by the beach and all we really think is, beach/sand/water/umbrellas, we most likely aren’t human, but instead we think freedom/joy/fun/family, etc. due to our experiences we had with the beach. If we come across a sign that we have never experienced before it might be blank, but we are soon to fill in the white space with movement and color and opinions, hence, again, we will know that we are indeed human.

Weekly Blog #4 Formalism

To sensationalize news is an interesting concept in which Shklovsky addresses in “Art as Technique.” We of course use art in most communication, but in the news it can be a touchy subject. For a news reporter to communicate their own personal opinion is out of context and frowned upon. When the Hindenburg went down and the reporter said, “Oh the humanity,” it would be considered “sensationalized.” Yet this is humane. When we watched the clip of a comedic scene in class where a news reporter was “sensationalizing” the news, it seemed inhumane however. We can see that he had no regard for the president that got shot, as he was trying to catch our attention through his acting like a game show host or sports reporter of some sort. In this way, he was acting, but in the case of the Hindenburg, he was himself. I would have to say that if the projection of thought, emotion or opinion is real, from the heart of the person, than it would be apropos, however if it was set up for the purpose of catching the audience’s attention, it would be a rhetorical device for the use of persuasion to a certain stance, which can be debatable on the ground of ethics.
Terry Eagleton was adamant that the discipline of literature not only a recreational device, but a means of sustaining the dominant social order. If we look at today, and replace “discipline of literature” with “media” we might be able to draw the same conclusion. What better way to influence the masses than by creating a movie, for example, that is not only viewed and accepted nationwide, but worldwide? A major concern and popular topic is subliminal messages in movies due to biased beliefs within the political system. This is how movies “actively produce ideology rather than merely reflect it,” as Eagleton says. They have been the source of people’s opinions changed or stances moved, values replaced and belief systems corrupted.

Weekly Blog #3 Enlightenment Theory and Criticism

Burke talks about the sublime as did Longinus, but he calls our attention to aesthetics. He says that we don’t give up acquired taste, but we need to in order to get back to our natural taste. This concept is interesting because, as we discussed in class, everyone has their own opinions as to what is beautiful, due to our experiences which form opinions which form natural tendencies to like or dislike something, calling it beautiful or repulsive, pleasant or unpleasant. He says “the power of distinguishing between the natural and the acquired relish remains to the very last.”
So as he implies there is a difference between our natural and acquired taste. But I would interject, is it even possible that we can perceive what our “natural taste” is since from the moment we are born, we start experiencing, and so forth? Also, since each person is unique, wouldn’t each person’s “natural taste” be different as well? Burke doesn’t think so. He says that “there is in all men a sufficient remembrance of the original natural causes of pleasure, to enable them to bring all things offered to their senses to that standard, and to regulate their feelings and opinions by it.”
Hegel talks about the master and slave concept. I would have to say that the way these two would be able to be on the same level of respect would have to be their relationship. If the master befriends the slave, would the slave not respect the master and therefore, if anything, work harder and enjoy his job a little more due to his care for his master? And wouldn’t the master grow compassion and enjoyment toward his slave, thus naturally treating him humanely?

Weekly Blog #2

     Aristotle was one to combat Plato without shame or timidity. He said a lot in his works, but I will focus on a few points and what came up in class. Upon watching the allegory of the cave in a new way, animated in a youtube clip, we experience the same idea as he was explaining. This “explanation” of his allegory is even twice removed from his text, as we have a narrator paraphrasing it, plus a pictorial depiction of it, which makes me wonder, as the prisoners might have wondered, what the real story was like when he told it.

     Longinus talks about the sublime, which is a concept we use in such a different way than what I think he meant. When we see something that is beautiful, we easily say it is “sublime.” But what do we really mean? We usually use it in such a casual way, with no rhyme or reason behind the moment other than chance, luck and happenstance. But Longinus advocates that “though nature is on the whole a law unto herself in matters of emotion and elevation, she is not a random force and does not work altogether without method,” so that even the things that are out of our control have some sort of method or reason to their being; their sublimity. Here is an example of an interpretation I would consider four times removed.

Reflection on my group presentation

     For my group presentation, we had a larger group than the others. In this way, it was harder to meet all at once, so we focused on emailing each other. We had a great powerpoint presentation with our individual notes submitted to one of the classmates. I enjoyed our presentation especially because I observed how six different theorists came together, or apart, all at once. It was good to be refreshed with information in a summarized way, and have the experience of teaching a whole class. It was interesting to speak out and hear so many different opinions and conclusions from both these theorists and the class all at once.
    Jean-Paul Sartre, the focus of my part in the presentation, was an interesting man to go in depth with. I realized, as did the people that study him, that he does not exactly answer his own question, "why write"? But instead he beats around the bush, lending to his purpose of having meaning end in the reader, not the author. In fact, this might be his subconscious effort to help us understand that we have to make the meaning "exist" by reading even his own open ended theory.
     One of the most interesting things I found is a point that Sartre makes about art and how he relates it to writing. He says that "we never receive from it that gaity of love. We put them into it," a subjective discovery. Since the art piece comes from the depths of our heart, we will never find anything but ourselves in it. He then relates it to reading in which "the author does not see the words as the reader does since he knows them before writing them down." He only "projects." This is an interesting statement to ponder.

Weekly Blog #1 Classical Literary Criticism

     It is interesting to see how Georgias of Leontini not only had a unique name, but had some unique views on speech. He differs from Plato's didactic view, which I found very interesting.  While most would look down upon wording ad phrasing that aims to persuade with no substane of truth, Gorgias praises it. He embraces rhetoric while Plato thinks it is utterly wrong. As he rose to be one of the most influential Sophists, we can see that there was definitely something approved and admired within his social construct and practice.
     How often do we hear that someone reads a poem and stands in awe; in agreement, but doesn't have a clue as to what it means? There is the same sort of appeal in the kind of speech pattern that Gorgias puts on a pedestal. Whether we admit it or not, there is a great commendation toward rhetoric; an approval and encouragement of it, because it has some sort of settling effect on us; a cathartic experience, and usually something to hold on to and root for at the end of a speech, for example.
      The diligent teacher is different then the great speaker. While both can collide, the teacher would have no place in rhetorical devices as a means to success, but truth revealed as a means to success. In the conviction, for example, of a stance in politics, he might spend more time researching and methodically revealing the information, while a rhetorical great speaker might spend more time on the wording and phrasing of the information, even if he had to say a speech on the spot, with little research done. He would use appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos for a strong argument, supporting what little solid facts he might have. In this scenario, the latter might easily be won by an audience of artists, but might lose in a group of politicians.
     In the case of Helen, not only do we have a speaker who is skilled with rhetoric, but a situation in which it is extremely unpolular and challanging to defend. The power of speech is highlighted here, however, to defend Helen quite eloquently.

Analysis #2 Structuralism

Structuralism is conveyed in this photo, taken by Dave Blumenkrantz, due to the juxtaposition of this soon to be mother and a machine for destruction. It creates a place to speak, to theorize, to investigate, instead of just gazing at the aesthetics. It decenters the individual portraying the self as a construct and a consequence of impersonal systems." They are not in control of their social existence, but "created by social and cultural systems, within which they are subjects" (Norton, 20) We focus on the internal approach here. What is this woman's life like? Why is a precious life about to be born next to a killing machine? What is she thinking? This evokes a string of conversation about the actual happenings within the picture, not just the composition of the picture. Rather, the composition evokes the structuralism therein. This picture poses a spectrum of possibilities as we realize the setting of her home.

Short Analysis #1 Classical Literary Criticism

Analysis on Classical Literary Criticism in viewing a scene from Good Will Hunting, analyzing Gorgias of Leontini and Platonic thought

There are many things to consider upon viewing the interview of Will Hunting for the National Security Agency. Keeping in mind Gorgias of Leontini’s thoughts, we see a character with a lot of strife and pain due to unhealed past experiences and the inhabitation of bitterness and a short temper. This doesn’t go over well with a quick-witted genius that is Will. In the encomium, we see a parallel circumstance; one in which the speaker is communicating in such an eloquent way that the audience may very well be convinced of something that is not necessarily true, and is definitely not the mainstream way of thinking in their particular cases. To defend Helen gave a place for Gorgias to, by default, prove that “the power of speech has the same effect on the disposition of the soul as the disposition of drugs on the nature of bodies” (Gorgias, 32). This argument was definitely “written with skill, not spoken with truth” in order to “displace one [opinion and] implant another” (32)

            In Will’s case, joining the NSA which is, as he says, is seven times bigger than the CIA, proving to be a widely held and accepted vocation, would be as horrific as about five terrorist and serial killer acts from one person. How did we get to this conclusion? Without going through a detailed summary, we can say that he arrived rhetorically with elegance due to a drive to persuade his audience of something. Rather, in context of the movie, we can see how desperate he is to avoid submission to authority and accept that he can enter a new world due to his rare talents. He uses his quick mind to convince his audience, including the viewers of the movie, that we really shouldn’t have anything to do with or support the NSA if there is even a chance of those horrible events playing out in real life. One reason why his speech works so well is that it appeals to the ethos, logos, and pathos. He comes off as if he has no reason not to speak his mind, for the sake of speaking his mind, not because he wants to impress them or get money out of them. He basically foregoes his chance at a very desirable job and income for the sake of not caring about what others think, and expressing himself, his “truth.” So now we believe our character, because he believes in what he is saying. He is driven because he is convicted and moved by his own ethos, logos and pathos. Within his words we are caught off guard upon hearing horrible situations in a string of events fly by so quickly we have to take a second glance. We know a lot is going on and feel horrible, we feel the pain of others and hear about situations that go on every day and there is nothing we can do about it, and widen our eyes to the fact that we might even be the catalyst. The logic behind his argument is basically undeniable. It is possible, and probably happening every day in some way or another. And so he wins us over.

            To this day, I myself feel trapped by Will’s argument, knowing full well that he was not in an unbiased, rational state of thought. It is the skill of this rhetorician in his words that is the persuasive “performance.” He is the antithesis to common thought, yet in less than two minutes had me reconsidering not only the NSA’s process of actions but any major corporation where the gears of the system, so to speak, have no part in some horrific, indirect outcome traced back to his unveiling of some code, for example. The place of uncertainty, the glue that holds Will’s argument together is uncertain things said in a certain way. What can be concluded from gathering together the pieces of this character is that, due to his intelligence and quick mind, he subconsciously constructs an enthymeme pertinent to his adamant point of view. His brokenness only lends to more of a weight on his argument, allowing himself to disregard any offensive, harsh, blunt and especially demeaning air about himself and deliver a solid, temptingly persuasive speech, just as Gorgias of Leontini did over twenty-three hundred years ago.

Introduction

I am looking forward to this class for a few reasons. When I found out we were going to be blogging, I was really excited because I love to journal, and to have a forum to visit about class seems like a great idea due to the higher guarantee of retaining so much information if it is written out. There is a lot of material to cover, starting with Plato and Aristotle, but I believe this class is very useful to critique any written work, as these theorists cover every aspect of it. I had attempted to take this class before and was overwhelmed with the information, leading to a dropping of the course. I am now attempting once more, and only once more, hopefully, because it is my last semester at CSUN. I feel as though I have been able to soak up much of the information in this class throughout my time at CSUN because of all the conversations in class. I realized how much of these theories leek in to all aspects of academia. Therefore, I hope to be diligent in reading these works and writing on this blog to have a solid lexicon of ancient thought processes that hold to be relevant, useful and rampant throughout our time today.