I must say that out of all the required reading I've ever had to do for
a course or class, Capote's Breakfast At Tiffany's has to be my favorite
book of them all so far. It is so wonderfully written, with witty
exchanges of dialogue and some of the best descriptive paragraphs I have
ever read before. Holly Golightly, the character whom the story focuses
on, is a very lively and colorful character who is so flesh-and-blood
and lifelike that she almost jumps off the page and into the room.
Also, in yesterday's class, I was very excited to see some excerpts from
the film version as well, which is, as any film buff will say, a
classic. However, I must say that the book is much better.
The film, starring the elegant and chic Audrey Hepburn, takes a
departure from the book in many ways. For instance, the content of the
book is much more racy and crude, which the Hollywood sensors of the
time would see to it to remove from the script. Also, the character of
Mr. Yunioshi, a Japanese photographer who lives in the same building as
Holly, is portrayed as a buck-toothed, slanty-eyed, rodent-looking
creature played by (in other films,) the quite talented Mickey Rooney.
Even as we watched these scenes with Yunioshi in class, I could hear the
sporadic "racist" exclamations. It just goes to show how much time has
changed since then.
Also, what I happened to notice in both the film and the novella,
is that the character of Holly Golightly is a very independent woman.
For her time, she is quite the antithesis of the "average woman" of her
day. She seems to almost assume the role of a man in various
situations. For instance, in the film, Holly is seen flouncing about
"Fred's" apartment in a man's shirt, mixing drinks and holding most of
the conversation while he lays in bed after an affair with another
woman. In a "typical" drama of the day, the woman would be the one
lying around in the bed with the man mixing drinks and holding light
conversation. The "reversal" here I found to be completely interesting
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Bookstore Analysis
I walk through the glass front doors of the Borders bookstore at
the Northridge Fashion Center. I often find myself in here, in search
of a good read. I am an avid book enthusiast and a voracious reader
with appetites for history, historic fiction, poetry, romance, fantasy,
and noir, as well as the occasional sci-fi novel. However, today, I am
conducting a sort of experiment. A series of observations, if you will,
for my Pop Culture class.
I take a seat at one of the tables at the Seattle's Best Coffee
Shop within the store. To make myself look less like someone who is
conducting a social experiment, I grab a copy of the New Yorker from the
magazine section. I sit back down, pretending to be interested in the
magazine, while my eyes flutter all around me to catch a glimpse of my
surroundings.
To my immediate right, sitting up against the bargain bookshelf, an
Asian girl, probably in high school, is reading "Teen Vogue." She is
wearing a white tank-top and jean shorts. She has her iPod earphones in
her ears. Whatever she is listening to, I can hear vaguely where I'm
sitting. I can catch a reggae tempo. Bob Marley, maybe?
Also, to my right, a middle-aged woman is looking at the rack of
2009 calendars that are already on the shelves. She is carrying a big,
white handbag, and is wearing a pink top with beige pants. She is
looking at one whose theme is puppies. They are very cute. I can see
the golden retriever puppy on the cover.
Dead ahead, directly in front of me is a man with a bluetooth in
his left ear. He is wearing a faded pink Hawaiian shirt and shorts.
He's drinking some sort of ice-blended coffee and reading some magazine
about cars and auto-mechanics. He seems quite content and "in the zone."
At the counter to my left, a guy is buying something at the coffee
place. He is talking to his friend about "Citizen Kane" and how he felt
about it. She listens intently, almost as if she's hanging on his every
word about the film. I take it, from her expressions and intensity,
that she has probably not seen the film yet, but is very interested in
doing so. I can relate to her, for I haven't seen it either, but would
very much like to.
I, too, can go on and on and on about what I saw, but I found it so
mesmerizing just to sit down and observe the behavior and reactions of
people all around me. Being a theatre major, I do this often, as it
helps me to really study people so that I may be able to expand my
creative choices when tapping into emotions for various roles I perform
onstage. However, this was a little different, for not only was
observing their emotions, but their clothing, their actions, even the
things that they were looking at or discussing. It was very fascinating.
The bookstore, I've come to realize, is a very free, open place
where people of all walks of life can come to unwind from the stress and
tension of the weekday by losing themselves in a classic work or
literature, by drinking coffee, or just catching up on the latest news.
It's like no one really cares who or what you are. They just know that
they are all their for the same reason and for the same thing.
the Northridge Fashion Center. I often find myself in here, in search
of a good read. I am an avid book enthusiast and a voracious reader
with appetites for history, historic fiction, poetry, romance, fantasy,
and noir, as well as the occasional sci-fi novel. However, today, I am
conducting a sort of experiment. A series of observations, if you will,
for my Pop Culture class.
I take a seat at one of the tables at the Seattle's Best Coffee
Shop within the store. To make myself look less like someone who is
conducting a social experiment, I grab a copy of the New Yorker from the
magazine section. I sit back down, pretending to be interested in the
magazine, while my eyes flutter all around me to catch a glimpse of my
surroundings.
To my immediate right, sitting up against the bargain bookshelf, an
Asian girl, probably in high school, is reading "Teen Vogue." She is
wearing a white tank-top and jean shorts. She has her iPod earphones in
her ears. Whatever she is listening to, I can hear vaguely where I'm
sitting. I can catch a reggae tempo. Bob Marley, maybe?
Also, to my right, a middle-aged woman is looking at the rack of
2009 calendars that are already on the shelves. She is carrying a big,
white handbag, and is wearing a pink top with beige pants. She is
looking at one whose theme is puppies. They are very cute. I can see
the golden retriever puppy on the cover.
Dead ahead, directly in front of me is a man with a bluetooth in
his left ear. He is wearing a faded pink Hawaiian shirt and shorts.
He's drinking some sort of ice-blended coffee and reading some magazine
about cars and auto-mechanics. He seems quite content and "in the zone."
At the counter to my left, a guy is buying something at the coffee
place. He is talking to his friend about "Citizen Kane" and how he felt
about it. She listens intently, almost as if she's hanging on his every
word about the film. I take it, from her expressions and intensity,
that she has probably not seen the film yet, but is very interested in
doing so. I can relate to her, for I haven't seen it either, but would
very much like to.
I, too, can go on and on and on about what I saw, but I found it so
mesmerizing just to sit down and observe the behavior and reactions of
people all around me. Being a theatre major, I do this often, as it
helps me to really study people so that I may be able to expand my
creative choices when tapping into emotions for various roles I perform
onstage. However, this was a little different, for not only was
observing their emotions, but their clothing, their actions, even the
things that they were looking at or discussing. It was very fascinating.
The bookstore, I've come to realize, is a very free, open place
where people of all walks of life can come to unwind from the stress and
tension of the weekday by losing themselves in a classic work or
literature, by drinking coffee, or just catching up on the latest news.
It's like no one really cares who or what you are. They just know that
they are all their for the same reason and for the same thing.
Romantic Comedy
I found this reading to be very engaging, as I have a great passion for all film. Romantic
comedies are no exception. Among my favorites are "Love Actually" and "The
Philadelphia Story" among others. However, if you were to ask me to define "romantic
comedy" before I read Chapter One of McDonald's very informative book about this
specific category of cinema, it would have been difficult for me to answer. McDonald
explains that "genre films" are generally associated with "bad American cinema" and
even states that for many film critics, as "the lowest of the low." Perhaps, she is
referring to the more contemporary romantic comedies that have been released for the
past few years, (those have been rather terrible for the most part.) Whatever the case,
near the end of the chapter, McDonald brings up a fascinating point that the main goal of
the romantic comedy, be it classic or contemporary, focus on the "old-fashioned"
fantasies of finding true love and happiness for "forever after."
I already know that I will enjoy this book, and look forward to discussing the material
further in class.
comedies are no exception. Among my favorites are "Love Actually" and "The
Philadelphia Story" among others. However, if you were to ask me to define "romantic
comedy" before I read Chapter One of McDonald's very informative book about this
specific category of cinema, it would have been difficult for me to answer. McDonald
explains that "genre films" are generally associated with "bad American cinema" and
even states that for many film critics, as "the lowest of the low." Perhaps, she is
referring to the more contemporary romantic comedies that have been released for the
past few years, (those have been rather terrible for the most part.) Whatever the case,
near the end of the chapter, McDonald brings up a fascinating point that the main goal of
the romantic comedy, be it classic or contemporary, focus on the "old-fashioned"
fantasies of finding true love and happiness for "forever after."
I already know that I will enjoy this book, and look forward to discussing the material
further in class.
de Beauvior response
To begin with, I found Simone de Beauvoir's article to be completely engaging. She
has a wonderful way with words. There were so many examples that I found that apply
to both her article and to pop culture, but since I am limited only to two, I chose two of
the ones I thought were the most fascinating. For example, on page three, de Beauvoir
quotes an excerpt of a text known as the Rapport d'Uriel by Benda. "'For him she is sex--
absolute sex, no less... He is the Subject, he is the Absolute-- she is the Other.'" This
particular excerpt and passage really stood out to me. First off, it completely backs de
Beauvoir's claim that (in the Western World, anyway,) woman has often been overlooked
by man in terms of being equal. In her opinion, they have, for the most part, been
viewed as objects of sexual desire and subservience. Also, Benda's quote completely
pertains to pop culture. The minute I read the excerpt, I immediately thought of
contemporary media and its portrayal of women. Many R-rated films, for instance, show
scenes that contain nudity and sex or sexual acts. How often does one see a nude man
in such shots? More often than not, it is the woman who is shown nude in these scenes.
Coincidence? I think not.
Another example that I found completely fascinating can be seen on the bottom of
page four and the top of page five. de Beauvoir is comparing women and proletariats.
She mentions that the word "we" is a key concept that separate the two. "Proletarians
[Russian revolutionists, the blacks of Haiti, and the Indo-Chinese] say 'We--' But women
do not say 'We,' except at some congress of feminists or similar formal demonstration;
men say 'women,' and women use the same word in referring to themselves. They do
not authentically assume a subjective title." She goes to say that women "...have gained
only what men have been willing to grant; they have taken nothing, they have only
received." I really had to think this over as it suddenly came over me. Did de Beauvoir
think that women couldn't fight for equality? I came to this conclusion by thinking about
the other examples she presents, such as the Russian revolutionists and the Indo-
Chinese. Both of these groups were led by men who have since left a lasting impact on
world history (Vladimir Lenin and Ho Chih Minh.) However, before I could analyze this
passage even more, de Beauvoir explains that "women lack concrete means for
organising themselves into a unit which can stand face to face with the correlative unit.
They have no past, no history, no religion of their own; and they have no such solidarity
of work and interest as that of the proletariat. They are not herded together in the way
that creates community." I understood this immediately, for they never were "grouped
together" by society like, say, Jews, Asians, or the various racial or ethnic/religious
groups were.
As one can see, I really took a lot from this article and had much to say about it! I
am looking forward to what people will say about this article in class tomorrow!
has a wonderful way with words. There were so many examples that I found that apply
to both her article and to pop culture, but since I am limited only to two, I chose two of
the ones I thought were the most fascinating. For example, on page three, de Beauvoir
quotes an excerpt of a text known as the Rapport d'Uriel by Benda. "'For him she is sex--
absolute sex, no less... He is the Subject, he is the Absolute-- she is the Other.'" This
particular excerpt and passage really stood out to me. First off, it completely backs de
Beauvoir's claim that (in the Western World, anyway,) woman has often been overlooked
by man in terms of being equal. In her opinion, they have, for the most part, been
viewed as objects of sexual desire and subservience. Also, Benda's quote completely
pertains to pop culture. The minute I read the excerpt, I immediately thought of
contemporary media and its portrayal of women. Many R-rated films, for instance, show
scenes that contain nudity and sex or sexual acts. How often does one see a nude man
in such shots? More often than not, it is the woman who is shown nude in these scenes.
Coincidence? I think not.
Another example that I found completely fascinating can be seen on the bottom of
page four and the top of page five. de Beauvoir is comparing women and proletariats.
She mentions that the word "we" is a key concept that separate the two. "Proletarians
[Russian revolutionists, the blacks of Haiti, and the Indo-Chinese] say 'We--' But women
do not say 'We,' except at some congress of feminists or similar formal demonstration;
men say 'women,' and women use the same word in referring to themselves. They do
not authentically assume a subjective title." She goes to say that women "...have gained
only what men have been willing to grant; they have taken nothing, they have only
received." I really had to think this over as it suddenly came over me. Did de Beauvoir
think that women couldn't fight for equality? I came to this conclusion by thinking about
the other examples she presents, such as the Russian revolutionists and the Indo-
Chinese. Both of these groups were led by men who have since left a lasting impact on
world history (Vladimir Lenin and Ho Chih Minh.) However, before I could analyze this
passage even more, de Beauvoir explains that "women lack concrete means for
organising themselves into a unit which can stand face to face with the correlative unit.
They have no past, no history, no religion of their own; and they have no such solidarity
of work and interest as that of the proletariat. They are not herded together in the way
that creates community." I understood this immediately, for they never were "grouped
together" by society like, say, Jews, Asians, or the various racial or ethnic/religious
groups were.
As one can see, I really took a lot from this article and had much to say about it! I
am looking forward to what people will say about this article in class tomorrow!
First Impressions
The first day of a new semester is always interesting for a student. For the most
part, it's a day of getting readjusted and getting back into the swing of homework,
exams, projects and all other form of academic activities. Of course, there is also that
dreaded time of walking into a classroom and sitting in awkward silence waiting for the
professor to come in. For the most part, my first days of new classes at CSUN have
been exactly like this, (save for the courses I take towards my major. I know almost
everybody there!) So far, one exception was when I stepped into this somewhat small
room in the Jerome Richfield building. First of all, there were a couple of people I
already knew and recognized. Second, the minute Professor Wexler stepped inside, all
that first-day awkwardness flew out the door. I would venture to say that it was one of
the best first days of class I've ever experienced.
We immediately delved right into the material. Our first assignment was to watch two
clips from two very different films, ("Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy"
and "Fatal Attraction,") and observe how women are portrayed in contemporary media.
To begin with, both stories are told from a male perspective. Also, both films showed
women as being weaker than their male counterparts, which, to me, was no surprise.
The United States is, like many nations in the West, a male-dominated society. For
centuries, the woman has always been viewed to be weaker and more submissive than
the man. This has always amused me, for it is women that go through the most as far as
the human body is concerned. They are the ones who go through menstruation and
childbirth. That is most certainly commendable. Most men I know would complain,
saying that they'd NEVER be able to endure such pain as that. So much for men being
the "stronger" ones.
Overall, I had a wonderful time analyzing the films and found the materials covered
this week to be very fascinating. I look forward to the upcoming weeks!
part, it's a day of getting readjusted and getting back into the swing of homework,
exams, projects and all other form of academic activities. Of course, there is also that
dreaded time of walking into a classroom and sitting in awkward silence waiting for the
professor to come in. For the most part, my first days of new classes at CSUN have
been exactly like this, (save for the courses I take towards my major. I know almost
everybody there!) So far, one exception was when I stepped into this somewhat small
room in the Jerome Richfield building. First of all, there were a couple of people I
already knew and recognized. Second, the minute Professor Wexler stepped inside, all
that first-day awkwardness flew out the door. I would venture to say that it was one of
the best first days of class I've ever experienced.
We immediately delved right into the material. Our first assignment was to watch two
clips from two very different films, ("Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy"
and "Fatal Attraction,") and observe how women are portrayed in contemporary media.
To begin with, both stories are told from a male perspective. Also, both films showed
women as being weaker than their male counterparts, which, to me, was no surprise.
The United States is, like many nations in the West, a male-dominated society. For
centuries, the woman has always been viewed to be weaker and more submissive than
the man. This has always amused me, for it is women that go through the most as far as
the human body is concerned. They are the ones who go through menstruation and
childbirth. That is most certainly commendable. Most men I know would complain,
saying that they'd NEVER be able to endure such pain as that. So much for men being
the "stronger" ones.
Overall, I had a wonderful time analyzing the films and found the materials covered
this week to be very fascinating. I look forward to the upcoming weeks!
Monday, October 27, 2008
Cat On a Hot Tin Roof
The use of ambiguity in Tennessee Williams' "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" is both marvelous
and maddening. For instance, there is a reference to a deal of some sort between
Margaret and her husband Brick that is never revealed, just hinted at throughout the
story. On the other hand, it is quite amazing in the sense that Williams was allowed
to "get away" with a lot more "taboo content" thanks to the use of ambiguity. For
example, in the play's text, there are subtle hints that Brick may either be homosexual
or had a homosexual affair with a young man named Skipper. Of course, it never
blatantly states the word "gay" or "homosexual," for the topic of such was almost
unspeakable during that time period in America (the 1950s.) I just found it interesting
that Williams, who was homosexual, managed to slip some innunendos into the text that
the reader or the audience member would not be able to pick up on. Repressed by
society, many popular gay writers of the time would follow a similar formula to that used
by Williams, thus allowing these authors to express themselves in a way that no one
would be able to recognize.
and maddening. For instance, there is a reference to a deal of some sort between
Margaret and her husband Brick that is never revealed, just hinted at throughout the
story. On the other hand, it is quite amazing in the sense that Williams was allowed
to "get away" with a lot more "taboo content" thanks to the use of ambiguity. For
example, in the play's text, there are subtle hints that Brick may either be homosexual
or had a homosexual affair with a young man named Skipper. Of course, it never
blatantly states the word "gay" or "homosexual," for the topic of such was almost
unspeakable during that time period in America (the 1950s.) I just found it interesting
that Williams, who was homosexual, managed to slip some innunendos into the text that
the reader or the audience member would not be able to pick up on. Repressed by
society, many popular gay writers of the time would follow a similar formula to that used
by Williams, thus allowing these authors to express themselves in a way that no one
would be able to recognize.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
My e-mail address!
I'm sorry! I totally forgot to put my e-mail address on here! I prefer my personal one, as my CSUN gets messed up sometimes. It's rockyhorrorbeatlesfan@yahoo.com.
There ya go!
:D
There ya go!
:D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
