We Created Britney

“Britney Spears.” There will be a good number of people quick to add a remark somewhere along the lines of how her fame brought her down, or that the wilder she went off the rails the harder it was to control. Many will remember her only as a “good girl gone bad”, and parents might use her as a model of a life they would most certainly not want their children to have. Could there be more to it? Is Britney alone responsible for the actions of Britney? Chris Smit argues that she is not. Instead, his notion is one that holds “us” more accountable for her idolization and downfall.

With the rise in cheap and easily accessible technology, the audience of the web (adolescents for the most part) have crafted together a network that ultimately contains ideologies and its own set of values that translate out into reality. In other words, the media on the web has become a system of expression and identity as time, money, effort is spent on it. Together, the ruling crowd in the virtual world has created space and demand for a Britney icon, one that embodies the type of life they admire or desire to be a part of. As Smit rightly states, “We were waiting for Britney Spears.”

-The Exile of Britney Spears by Chris Smit
______________________________________________________________________________

Cockfights and Demographics - Quentin J. Schultze

In the process of analyzing and discussing aspects of culture, it is easy to fall into what Schultze terms “transmission views”. As opposed to “cultural views”, transmission views see ideas as an organized whole. Using this view, one can dissect and measure factors of culture, communication and values as empirical, quantifiable facts. It typically draws on technique of advertisement and manipulation, ways to appeal to the masses in order to gain a certain reward. Schultze encourages a move away from this view as it does little to explain human communication rightly in its fullness and complexity. The more they are technologized, the less human they seem to become. He also reminds christian communication analysts that humans are not passive “receivers”, and that the voice and will of God plays a big role in the outcomes of human communication.

Cultural views alternatively attempt to participate in the experience of human communication by being as immersed in it as possible. By being a part of the experience, they are generally able to capture more of its man-made, creative nature. They tend to be more respectful and understanding of different cultures and types of expression, and capture the communal essence of culture - how values are created and shared collectively. Schultze uses the example of his trip to Bali, and his experience with the frequent cockfights. He came to see that cockfights were a representation of the society’s inner turmoils expressed freely in a culturally-acceptable way. However, as good as its intentions may be, it can easily blur the boundaries of morality because of the nature of cultures to create their own context for values. Like Christopher Columbus made his maps of “India” when he was really in North America, cultures may have distorted maps of reality. 

Related:

• TedTalk: When are we entitled to judge?

A penny for your thoughts?

• Schultze recognizes that because cultures create their own context for morality and culturally-acceptable actions, the maps with with they communicate and live may be distorted. Personally, this presents by itself a dilemma. How are we to judge them based on our set of self-created ideas? How can be know what to base off our judgements on? 
• The story of Britney is bound to repeat itself with a new icon in the media. (For example, with Miley Cyrus) Is there a way that it can be stopped? Should it be stopped?

Culture Today

In the except of What is Culture?, Michael Warren attempts to uncover the reality of what culture is, and with it, debunking the false beliefs that many people share about it. He stresses that culture is not to be taken as a “finished product”, one that is static and unchanging, as if it had a protective barrier around it. In other words, it shouldn’t be looked at as if it were an object, or worse, a commodity. Culture has been formed in complex ways and been crafted intricately by the historical evolution and economy of a particular society. With a mere passing glimpse, one cannot hope to understand it in its richness — the ongoing activity, the influence it simultaneously creates and is engulfed by, the connections between social and personal decisions, etc. 

Warren explores the evolution of the meaning of “culture” itself. During the Enlightenment period, a sense of cultivated lifestyle implied a life of luxury, one meant for the elite. Towards the late 19th century, culture became equivalent to a form of enlightenment that people sought to reach. Culture now, according to Warren, should be a type of signifying system that communicates and stabilizes social order in society as society gives it the tools to do so. At the same time, true culture should be studied in its original context. The “italian culture” here is not an accurate representation of the culture in Italy. It is drawn out of its socioeconomic context and is may be really a result of italian marketing. True culture is where the “wider social order is communicated, reproduced, experienced, and explored” (Warren 7).

Extended:

• The current social networking culture 
• More on Warren’s inspiration: Raymond Williams

A penny for your thoughts?

Warren explained that in the past, culture was seen as a type of enlightenment, something to be learnt, attained, appreciated. Do you think we are guilty of seeing it as such when we engage in forms of cultural tourism? Do you think that we can put too much care in organizing and analyzing the things we experience, that it creates a fine line between the “us” and “them”? What can be done to avoid that situation?

Varieties of Rhetorical Criticism (part II)

Brummett last left off examining the ways a text can be read through a psychoanalytical lens. He moves, in chapter 5, to feminism, and provides insights on how it can be used to explain the implications of a text.  This school of thought is found under the notion/observation that women are belittled by a naturally patriarchal society. The patterns of empowerment of the sexes are unconsciously reinforced in individual minds as society practices them in daily life, whether or not it is explicitly intended to cause a disturbance. (Language, and the usage of signs, be it certain phrases or words, interrelates, suggests, or discourages linked ideas). However, this pertains not only to women as “feminism” suggests, but also to groups who aren’t considered the “norm”. Queer theory describes just that. It explores the idea of gender-role-reversal that the LGBT community tends lead. They challenge feminism in a way that society has never before seen.

The media’s importance in influencing thought is not something many have not heard of. However, it is an area that is overlooked, perhaps because most believe they have the basic gist of it down. Brummett challenges the critic to take a deeper look into the subject. Tragedy and comedy as they are patronized by millions of TV watchers, offers important insight on how individuals deal with stress or a discordance of thoughts. Comedies portray its’ main character often as comic fool, who despite his failure, is reinstated back into society and forgiven. Tragedies portray the tragic hero. Both of these ideas form a parallel to the ways stressed is coped with. The mediums which such programs are viewed also shed light on how the media changes people’s mindsets as they engage in television watching, net surfing, etc. Media logic suggests that “habitual use of a mechanism creates distinct ways of thinking”. For example, television shows blurs the perception of reality because of the effort spent making television appear as real as possible. Computers have brought the mindset of fluidity (ease of access), speed and control, and dispersal through online shopping, youtube, Google, etc. 

Brummett's earlier chapters and Olthius's On Worldviews have agreed, that once perceptions have been changed, actions tend to follow suit.

Furthur reading:

• More on Kenneth Burke's legacy "Tragedy and Comedy"
• Dan Chandler's Cultivation Theory (related to influence of television on perception)

A Penny For Your Thoughts?

• It is incredible that so many perspectives can be applied to one film, The Wizard of Oz, which seems to be Brummett's favourite movie. But if such films were at some points trying to, for example, expose disjunction in governments (as by the deception of the wizard) or to reverse the gender roles, how are we to say that it has been successful if people are seemingly unaware? 
• Brummett talks about language as a tool for suggesting or discouraging certain images so as to, in a way, manipulate people's perceptions, such as in the God-Guide-Guard example. If it supposedly affects us unconsciously, how would you explain those who strongly believe against it? (In a way, this is similar to the first question- what about people who truly do not see the references made in text?)

Rhetoric in Culture: Texts & Critics

In this portion of Rhetoric in Popular Culture (chapters 3 & 4), Barry Brummett explores the deeper idea of what “texts” are as they pertain to popular culture, as well as the essential role of critics in bringing out its relevance for life. Texts, as he describes, are sites of struggle over meaning. They can be anything from works of literature, songs on the radio, a presidential debate or painted advertisements on the side of a bus. To the trained eye of a critic, texts reveal the values that particular cultures hold. Therefore, it is the job of the critic to extract various possible meanings from a text, interpret the subtle messages and to display the effect the text has for certain groups of people in society. They dig to find intertextuality, or swallowed text that may be adapted from an old context (that may no longer hold explicit meaning though it may be been successful in the past) in order to serve the current agenda. Critics give their two cents for, or perhaps on behalf of, those who either cannot articulate its meaning themselves or are unaware of it. In the overall scheme of things, critics are concerned over the distribution of power-- how it may be held, lost, or transferred, all through texts. To top it off, critics make a judgement call regarding a way to address the issue at hand. They have the power to encourage people to a movement or a change in lifestyle. Most importantly, Brummett says that that power is not reserved for, say, your university Communications professor. It lies within reach of anyone who is willing to thoroughly scourge through a text, behind the direct and implied meanings, and towards the deeper structured (yet common) patterns of culture.

The focus shifts in chapter 4 towards the possible messages that texts could have. Here, they are examined through 1) culture, 2) Marxist philosophy, 3) Visual methods, and 4) Freud’s psychoanalytic theory. Culture is vital in that it contains artifacts (also sites full of meaning) as well as the keys involved in understanding them. Different cultures provide a different outlook on the same events, and this acts as a framework for making judgement calls appropriate to the circumstance. However, one must be careful not to encroach on an ethnocentric view, whereby foreign cultures are evaluated through the eyes of one’s own culture. It is also important to note that it is not solely the text that should be studied, but in accord with the response that follows-- for this makes the whole meaning of a text. The Marxist’s philosophy believes that everything to do with ideas and concepts has “grown from material conditions and practices”. In effect, it follows that every aspect of life can be correlated to economics, such that values are bought and sold like commodities according to individuals’ personal socioeconomic needs. It parallels these thoughts to an interpretation of the Wizard of Oz, where Dorothy, the sole lazy worker on the farm wishes to live a richer and more pampered life. However, when a tornado whisks her away to a faraway land, she spends her time finding (or earning the solution to) a way back. Marxists would say that this story reeks of isolationism and anti-foreign entanglement propaganda, promoting the value of “home” where one is economically stable, if even though the work and difficult it may not be the preferred position. 

Source: image

(cont...) 

Because the Wizard of Oz could have possibly been a response to the people’s climb out of the Great Depression, the meaning of the film has changed.  Through the psychoanalytic view of Freud, Brummett believes rhetoric in popular culture satisfies unconscious desires. Films, especially, create the illusion that the characters are speaking directly to the audience, “suturing” the viewer to the storyline in the film. The viewer is then able to relate to the characters in the film who may be acting out on desires that may be socially inappropriate in reality. This then fulfills a sense of self-maintenance and completion for the viewer. The same goes with images, or visual texts. Because of its more ambiguous and flexible nature, images are made more dynamic and meaningful with a context. Brummett uses the example of Hurricane Katrina, a devastation that elicited the sending of thousands of aid packages from all over the nation. Why does this not happen when war and destruction is aired from third world countries, displaying the terror that happens everyday? We Are The World (25 For Haiti) is another example of how much power a text (in this case, a song) can hold if there are enough forces and context for it to move people towards action. (It is also an example of intertextuality-- it is a remake of the original song from artists that banded to help the African famine in 1985).

Related articles/topics:

• “How Fox News is Killing the Republican Party and Other Things I have No Business Talking About” (--just the title is subtly amusing too--)

• Student research article about the effects the promotion of Apple products has on the values of youth. Reinforces Marxist “economic metaphors”, or the philosophy that values are like commodities to be put up for bargain and sold to those who “buy [into]” them.

Discussion questions:

• Brumett warns against cultural hegemony, where an empowered group enforces their preferred (so it benefits them) meaning of a text so much so to the point where it begins to be accepted even be disempowered groups. Are there any instances of this today?

• According to the Marxist philosophy, what are some of the values that you (or people that you know) have supported or "bought" recently?

"On Worldviews"

-James H. Olthuis (Article author)

We can all relate to it. Even James Olthuis himself as an adolescent has, in all likelihood, pondered the meaning of his existence in this world. Moreover, he has probably wondered what meaning and purpose life holds, if any individual can but leave only a smudge in the history of the universe. Most of us have experienced such confusion, but more importantly, the relief that showers us when we place our faith and belief in a variety of options. May it be a deity, an occupation or in family- We finally sort our individual priorities based on our perceptions of reality. These perceptions, Olthuis believes, are a sort of lens through which we view the world in order to act and make intelligent decisions. This is our worldview. 

Olthuis says our worldview is shaped by and deeply rooted in a myriad of factors: our childhood, faith, traditions in culture, socioeconomic position, emotional experiences, intellectual development, temperament, etc. As we perceive and understand reality within our own mindset, we are shaped and moulded to make certain judgements about the many things in reality. This perception of the world may include a “foundational” set of morals for us, truths, a vague idea of what is acceptable or unacceptable within the boundaries of our culture. In Olthuis’ words, it “tells us what is and is not, but also what ought or ought not to be the case.” It is a vision of life, yet a vision also for life. Reciprocally, these same judgements allows us to form conclusions about reality, ones that are our own. These beliefs give us direction and purpose in life. It then should not come as a surprise that these worldviews and cultures vary quite widely between countries, cultures, neighbors. Differences in people come down to differences in ideas.

Often, these pre-made judgements can hinder our path to truth and understanding. Conflicts arise because of a lack of understanding between two parties. We are generally very protective of the things in which we have rooted our worldview. If our faith, traditions, or values were under attack, our worldview may be broken down or abandoned. Whole societies, as Olthuis believes, could collapse with the fallen worldview. However, worldview is not a static unwavering pillar that gets in the way. Olthuis explains that because of the acquired nature of worldviews, they are meant to be ever-evolving and meant to allow the individual to reflect upon the situation at hand. He reminds us of the reciprocity between worldview and all the factors that have shaped it. Room for a change in worldview translates into an increase in awareness of oneself and ones’ beliefs, which progresses to a change in feelings and actions. At many times, the individual will realize that there is some truth within another's worldview. Though Olthuis says this will cause some tension, the most natural response is rationalize and slightly change one's worldview to allow this new truth to fit in with the rest. This allows individuals to mature, and for societies to develop and advance. 

A penny for your thoughts?

• Have you been in a situation where you had to reassess your worldview and possibly realize that it may be lacking in some areas? 

• In his article, Olthuis talks about working towards a "new harmony". We can only assume he might be referring to a future society where the boundaries of conflicting worldviews may be alleviated. Realistically, how might this be achieved without the danger of creating a civilization where people are made to do and think the same things?