so long to blogging

So it’s my last entry. What should be discussed? Since I seem to be on a roll, lets talk some more about ideology and hegemony: Individual/elite interests parading as our own. Ideology and hegemony are everywhere, especially music. Rock N’ Rock, as we are told by Lawrence Grossberg, became popular in the 1950′s, when the white consensus was smashed by the introduction of this new music. Rock N’ Roll brought a revolution. The pill was introduced around the same time period, which caused a huge power shift, without the help of Rock N Roll. Because of this new independence women have to control pregnancy, women had more control over their lives. Obviously this control was somewhere before it was given to women, so who was it taken from? Men and the state. This caused WHITE MALE ANGER.Why? Because white males were displaced from the top of the hierarchy thanks to liberalization. The structural balance of society had been shifted and now, these white men had to share with women, gays, etc. what they had been keeping to themselves all this time; rights and privileges. This all occured in the 1960′s, during a cultural revolution. In the 1980′s, deregulation took place, which gave even less control to the state. It was seen as the economic way of dealing with the liberal agenda. The problem is, once nothing is regulated anymore, the DOMINANT group will take it all. But di the United States see this as a problem, or did they think the dominant group taking over would be good? Either way, this deregulation changed every part of society. It turned national companies into transnational organizations. The United States believed that the market should be freehanded; lightly regulated if regulated at all.

Rock N Roll, Birth Control, or Deregulation. To which can we owe our freedom to? I would say, Rock N Roll and the pill, but deregulation hasn’t given us anymore control than we had before. Sure, the market is free, but that doesn’t give us more control, it gives the mass corporations more control. When the mass corporations have most of the control, one can be sure that their ideologies are being enforced upon the population as a group interest. Take record labels for example. Like I explained in one of my previos entries, record labels only let a  certain stereotype of a black male be seen bty their consumers. They promote a ghetto, drug dealing rap artist carrying guns and drinking the most expensive bottles of liquor. They give us this stereotype, and tell young black men that this is what they should inspire to be. They tell the audience watching and listening to the music that these are the kinds of clothes to wear and the kind of alcohol to drink. And if you think these companies aren’t reinforcing their own interest by suggesting clothes, food, alcohol and shoes? Just because it’s not music? THINK AGAIN. The music industry is more than just music and a rap artist is more than just a musician. They are a BRAND NAME. 50 Cent for example. He has his CDs and concerts, but he also has a TV reality show, a video game, a clothing line,  EVEN A BOTTLED WATER COMPANY. Puff Daddy: another mass corporation power house. These are the black male versions of the Olsen Twins, they each have their own mega empire. It is so much more than just the music. You gotta love ideology.

50 Cent the new Mary-Kate and Ashley?

look what pop culture has done 6

On January 30th, the infamous video “David After Dentist” was uploaded onto YouTube. Sixteen million, seven hundred and sixty three thousand, three hundred and thirty eight hits later, I think it’s fair to say that David has become a YouTube phenomenon. It’s only been two months, and this seven year old has become famous. For what? Well, its a bit clear after you watch the clip, and personally, I still find it extremely funny; David is experiencing the affects of drugs after a dental surgery. Now as amusing as this video is, don’t you find this somewhat abusing towards the child? David’s father uploaded a video of his seven year old son on drugs.. Isn’t that degrading? This video could be very embarassing for David. If not now, it will in the future. David has become famous for getting high off laughing gas. People will recognize David now, and the only thing they will picture is him as a high seven year old. David has his father to thank for this. It’s great for now, David is getting his 15 minutes of fame. In fact, here is a list of JUST SOME of the video responses on YouTube

• Chad after Dentist
• David After Remix
• Metal Tribute
• Super Troopers Mash Up
• David After Divorce
• David After Drugs
• David Intervention
• Cartoon version
• Mario Theme
• David after Donuts
• Soulja Boy Remix

And here are some other accomplishments since January 30th 2009.

• Photo shoot with Mickey and Minnie Mouse
• Radio/TV interviews
• New store (sells mostly shirts)
• New logo
• International Shipping!
• Chicago Sun unapproves David after Dentist
• Interview for The Today Show

David isn’t the only kid to get famous thanks th their parents. Britney Spears was spotted on talent search is just one example. Parents used to do this with their children before, but thanks to YouTube, anyone can become famous. And hey, if you’re camera shy, or don’t have the right personality, you can always use your seven year old son to live your dream. This reminds me of the midterm video titled YouNarcissist which gave an indepth view of how self-absorbed people get with the mindset of having an audience. In only two months, this seven year old (with the assistance of his dad) has got a blog up and running that is one of the most egotistical things I have seen to date. Yea, I think this is one of the funniest videos foun d on Youtube right now, but come on. Somebody has got to break the news to David. You were only videotaped by your dad on drugs and put on YouTube. Nothing that special happened to you, and there’s not going to be many people keeping tabs on your blog all about this one incident that occured in the seven entire years of your existent.

Seriously though, what is this phenomenon of putting videos of your young children on the internet, on drugs, swearing, doing embarrassing things they will likely regret later in life? Strangelove told us in class; even if a video gets taken off one website, it’s still somewhere on the internet. He also gave us great advice that these parents could learn a olt from: Be careful of what you post on YouTube or Facebook, etc., it could really damage you if you were to ever run for president.

PS. I don’t mean to come off so negative David, don’t take it personally I’m just trying to make a point. Someday you’ll be angry at your dad about this.

look what pop culture has done 5

This video is a submission for a Doritos contest. The contest involves brainstorming a new flavour and making an ad for it. The winner’s flavour and ad will be used in the new campaign!!! Many organizations are coming to terms with the rise of the internet and the freedom that comes with it. Online ad campaigns are getting more popular everyday – companies are finally understanding why their advertising on television and in newspapers is becoming less effective. With the rise of online advertising, there has been a rise of contests involving more than entering your name on a ballot. Now that people can create their own videos, blogs, etc on the internet, people have more freedom to show their creative side. Because of this, many companies have done the same as Doritos. They have started contests on YouTube and other websites involving the use of creativity. The number of video submissions for contests, or video-related contests have gone up increasingly thanks to how easy it is to do it. Even teachers are giving more and more assignments involving music and video technology. Ten years ago – heck, even five – video assignments such as the one Strangelove gave our class as a midterm project were a RARITY. Now, if you take a look on YouTube, there are tons of videos done for classes, all the way down to elementary school.

Doritos’ contest is extremely creative, and with all these imaginative people sending in their ideas, they are definitely saving money on advertising – be it brainstormers, ad writers, producers, directors, etc. These contestants are literally handing Doritos already made commercials, more or less ready to put on television.

I would like to note that Doritos submissions are sent to an email or personal website. Of course they make their way onto YouTube, but which videos don’t? Another big contest person on YouTube is Miley Cyrus. Apparently she has video contests on YouTube, I’m not sure what the details are. And no, I am not a fan of Miley Cyrus, I just came across it on YouTube.

ideology for a younger audience

During the course of writing this blog, I have discussed popular culture and media, focusing on modern versions of both. For this entry, I would like to look at a different type of media. I have mainly been focusing on YouTube, the Internet, and Television; newer media forms. It is important to look at older types of media that have been around for a long time. Specifically, I would like to talk about children’s books.

Ideologies – ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class or culture – are present everywhere, ESPECIALLY within children’s literature. When kids grow up, they are introduced to fairy tales at bedtime. They see these tales as adventurous and interesting. What they are unaware of are the lessons they are learning while listening to these stories. Of course, written versions of these tales have been overtaken by the Disney powerhouse and most children today – instead of being read to at bedtime – watch these stories in movie form during the day. This does not change the fact that they are learning lessons and being introduced to stereotypes at a young age. They may not even know that they are in fact absorbing this information. Girls are told by these tales that their role is to be the “damsel in distress”, boys are put into the role of the “knight in shining armour” or the “hero”. Girls are taught at a young age through these fairy tales that they need to rely on men.

Girls also learn important lessons through the “Princess” stories. In Snow White, one of the many lessons learned is NOT TO ANSWER THE DOOR FOR STRANGERS, as well as to LIE if you’re home alone. Cinderella teaches a girl to WORK HARD and you will eventually get what you want.

These fairy tales portray IDEOLOGIES, which are dangerous in this sense because since the stories are so old, the ideologies are those from the past. Women are equal to men in modern day, yet we are still teaching children that they need to rely on a man.

After a girl has grown out of fairytales, they are introduced to the “coming of age” novels. They do exist out there for boys – books such as Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, but I have more knowledge regarding the books for girls, since I am a female and read many “coming of age” novels as a young reader. For girls, examples of these books are The Guests of War (Much more modern), Little Women and Anne of Green Gables.

In a coming of age novel, the main characters undergoes growth and development as a human being. They deal with family, friend, cultural, societal and personal issues. Little Women is a classic example of a coming of age novel. The four sisters each have a character flaw that they overcome by the end of the book. Beth is shy, Jo has a bad temper, and Amy loves to be the centre of attention and Meg is vain. The book teaches the reader that these characteristics are not good ones to have through the use of these characters. This novel emphasizes the ideology that women are not to have hot tempers along with many others.

What I am trying to point out is that even in children’s literature, there are ideologies placed upon us – at a very young age in these cases.

look what pop culture has done 4

I introduce you to the female, teen (i assume?) version of Weird Al Yankowich. This amateur YouTuber makes spoofs of various celebrities. When I found this on YouTube I admit, it kind of weirded me out. But if you actually listen to the lyrics, or.. follow along at the bottom, the song is somewhat smart – given her  age. It isn’t very indepth, but it’s an interesting spin on the Miley Cyrus hit, “The Seven Things I Hate About You”, this version being titled “The Seven Things Guys Don’t Have To Do”. What I find interesting about this spoof is the point it actually raises regarding the list of duties women preform, most of which are to make themselves look better. After listing the many different tasks, the girl states “And the reason why, we do the crazy things that we do, is we do it for you” (You referring to males). The truth is, we don’t necessarily do these habits for men. Women have been told by society and popular culture – NOT MEN – what they have to do to look beautiful. It isn’t necessary to “blow all your money on hair salons” or inhale hair dye fumes. No guy has out right said that a girl HAS to count pounds or wear thongs, these are just ideals that have been placed upon women. This spoof is actually really insightful if you were to look at it in this perspective: the “guy” in the song repsenting society. After writing many blog entries, attending class, and reflecting on what we have learned, I have realized one main point: Everything always comes down to IDEOLOGY and HEGEMONY.

look what pop culture has done 3

This reiterates mt point even further. My point that young children’s minds are shaped and moulded very easily. The younger the child, the easier they are to mould. This TWO YEAR OLD is playing the video game Guitar Hero on EXPERT, a feat that even I cannot achieve. I’d like to note that this little boy is incredible, because even with my adult sized hands, I still can’t reach the fifth button, which is crucial in a level such as expert. If a two year old can get up to the highest level on a video game, clearly he has the ability to use his mind for other, more useful things. Guitar Hero requires hand-eye coordination, and rythym; skills that a two year old APPARENTLY possesses. It would be incredile to see what little boys such as this one can achieve academically if they put their mind to it. Instead of watching educational videos, the children of today play video games and watch major motion pictures. Popular culture has certainly affected these children and their parents. Parents introduce popular culture at an extremely young age. What this video says to me, is that children clearly have a high ability to achieve, and that parents should take advantage at this. If your kid is beating video games I can’t beat, then they have talent, and it’s not solely video games. Someone with the ability to get to the highest level of a video game definitely have other skills within them. We should be spending the crucial years of child development developing necessary skills for life. There is so much that we can feed into the brains of these kids that are much more important then say, the summary of Star Wars Episode IV.

look what pop culture has done 2

This is another example of the socialization of children. It’s kind of hard to tell what the little girl is saying, since she is again only three, and she’s a bit more hard to understand compared to the last toddler. Despite the difficulty in understanding, I’m pretty sure this little girl said something about learning it in a movie. If you haven’t watched the clip, this girl says that if she sees a monster she will “kick his ass”. She says that if she doesn’t the monster will kick her ass, because that’s what she saw in a movie. Again, children’s brains are extremely easy to mould. With the rise of television, parents have turned to the ELECTRONIC BABYSITTER. Parents find it much simpler to place their kids in front of the TV for a couple hours, rather than finding imaginative ways to keep the children busy. Unfortunately, once the parents leave the room, they don’t know what’s being shown on the television. This form of media is socializing todays children, perhaps more than their parents, friends, and teachers. We need to make this media child friendly because of the fact that we have to be very careful regarding what these kids are absorbing. Again, I would like to point out that there are much more fundamental skills that these children can be learning.TV has proved to us that children are learning at this young age. If this is so, these years should be spent developing the minds and opinion of these kids to make an intelligent generation of them. There are so many important things that can be introduced to young chidren as opposed to media that teaches children swear words.

look what pop culture has done

First off, isn’t this girl the most adorable thing? Second, and more importantly, look at how much we are influenced by popular culture. Here we have a three year old talking about Star Wars. Okay, so her interpretation isn’t the most accurate, but she still has been influenced by the movie. I believe that this video helps portray the major influence that motion pictures have on children. This girl is three years old, so she isn’t even in kindergarden yet. She probably knows more about Star Wars and other movies she has watched, than she does about primary and secondary colours, telling time, etc. If a three year old is able to absorb so much information regarding a popular movie, than she most definitely has the ability to absorb more academic information. Children’s minds can be shaped extremely easily, which I discussed in my midterm assignment. Although watching movies and TV is a leisure activity that all children should participate in, I think that more time should be dedicated to scholarly material. It is clear through this video that children, even at the age of three can learn and interpret what they see. This should be used to the society’s advantage. If we were to eliminate or even minimize the amount of useless television toddlers watch, and replace it with things they typically would be learning a year or two later when they enter elementary school, we would have more valuable time to educate them.

everyday plagiarism

I’ve been pondering, and I’m stuck. Intertextuality, the shaping of texts’ meanings through the use of other texts, seems like a form of plagiarizing for me. There are numerous references to people and TV shows and movies every day, whether it be on another TV show, another movie, a book, etc. It could even be in a conversation with a friend, or professor. Despite the use of referencing, I never see anybody accrediting the original author/idea maker. Because of this, I find that plagiarism and intertextuality are somewhat connected.

Plagiarism is defined – by dictionary.com – as “the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work”

So I’m going to take a look at our everyday lives, and how often we “plagiarize.” In my last entry I wrote about INTERTEXTUALITY, which I have come to see as a lower form of plagiarism. Looking at our everyday lives, and seeing for ourselves how many times we practice intertextuality, it makes it seem impossible to always be using our own original work. I quoted Arrowsmith in my last blog entry and I will one more time; “All language is itself intertextual, since language always pre-exists the speaker: words and meanings are always second-hand in some sense.”

It seems we can break down our definition of plagiarism a bit more. “Close imitation,” suggests that we cannot present something as our own that closely mirrors someone else’s ideas or work. “Unauthorized use,” suggests that we cannot refer to something without being approved of doing so first. So TECHNICALLY, every time we sing “Happy Birthday” to celebrate, we are plagiarizing since we were never authorized to use this copyrighted material. Whenever we quote one of our favourite movies we could be viewed as a plagiarizer. That is, if someone were to quote Sex in the City to an audience that is unaware of the show, the audience may assume that this person is witty and a quick thinker for coming up with such a hilarious one-liner so fast. This person, assuming that everyone has seen that particular episode of the show, would be taking credit for someone else’s work without even knowing it.

Breaking down the definition makes it seem as if we are plagiarizing all the time. We may not know we are, but from my understanding, anyone who uses someone’s idea, quote, etc. – knowingly but without acknowledging the original author – would count as plagiarism. Making the assumption that everybody knows where in popular culture a certain quote comes from is dangerous in that some people may perceive it as your own idea.

Plagiarism is key in scholarly work, and is not that important in everyday life. But with an ever-growing population of trademarks and copyrights, it seems that plagiarism will soon be a part of our everyday lives.

EVEN CATS USE INTERTEXTUALITY!!!

Intertexuality Gone Mad

Intertextuality: Texts exist in cultural and aesthetic contexts alongside other texts. They influence one another and often refer to one another overtly, this being a particular characteristic of postmodernist writing. In fact, all language is itself intertextual, since language always pre-exists the speaker: words and meanings are always second-hand in some sense. – Arrowsmith

In more simplistic terms, intertexuality is the shaping of texts’ meanings by other texts. Grossberg brings up the concept of intertextuality in his book, We Gotta Get Out of This Place. According to Grossberg, the meaning of any one text is deeply dependent on the text around it. One text is ALWAYS refering to other texts. Due to the length of time we have been creating meanings – which can technically go back to BC times – it is nearly impossible NOT  to reference other people or texts.

It’s not just media texts that are connected to intertextuality, we refer to different people and things daily. AS Arrowsmith puts it in the quoation above, which I will repeat, “since language always pre-exists the speaker: words and meanings are always second-hand in some sense”.  How many times I quote Borat or Wedding Crashers or some funny YouTube video on any given day is incredible. Here’s a little Facebook examples. This photo was taken at Pub101′s last week. If you have been keeping tabs on my blog, you would have viewed the YouTube video titled “My New Haircut”. It is my belief that this video kick started the jaggerbomb trend at bars. If you take a look at the comments of this photo, you will notice the references to “My New Haircut”

But this is only an example of peoples’ use of intertextuality. You could be referencing something without even noticing it. Everytime I say, “yadda yadda yadda“, I am referencing Seinfeld. “That’s hot” goes to Paris Hilton. “I liiiiiiike”, to Borat. “Could you BE anymore jealous?” (Or any other over emphasis on a word..) Chandler from Friends. “Homeboy would poison my drink” Lauren Conrad.

Family Guy is another perfect example of intertextuality. There are dozens of references in every episode. Here is a short clip

I think I have reinforced my point well enough.

Today, I sign off by proposing a challenge for you all. Try and make a record of how many times you reference something or someone in a day. Even a day could be a bit overwhelming. Less if you want. The point is for you to realize just how many times you do this. You will be amazed at how many times you do this. Maybe leave out the roots to words, where each word came from, all that is obvious.