Moderately Racist Comedy

A recent example of modern satire is seen in one of College Humor's latest videos, "The Guy Who Over-Pronounces Foreign Words". It's a bit self explanatory.

Basically, one man embarrasses his friends at a restaurant as he exaggerates pronunciations of countless foreign words and foods in what he believes to be the proper fashion, defending himself with a cheery "People like it when you embrace their culture, it's very respectful" as he goes right along butchering words.

I think this is both a form of hyperbole and verbal irony, as the video suggests the man's actions are respectful while clearly meaning the opposite as he endlessly over-pronounces words. The video effectively calls out those who mock foreign cultures, those who defend mocking foreign cultures, and those who get severely offended when witnessing racist behavior all at once without clearly taking a side or making a stand. The video makes us laugh at the expense of political correctness, like countless other manifestations of comedy today. Oftentimes in modern comedy racist remarks are a great source of material, so long as they're kept light or spoken by someone who could be accused themselves of the remarks they're making. Racist remarks with a proper disclaimer are usually laugh-worthy... the trouble lies in drawing the line between funny enough and just too offensive.

"There's nothing funny about serial rape...but-"

I love satire; I am not embarrassed to call south park possibly my favorite TV show and I am actively trying to lessen how sarcastic I am because it confuses my mom. However, I think it can get very risky. Jokes being ironic or funny to some is not an excuse for them being offensive. Specifically with rape jokes. It's a little baffling that there are so many comedians producing them and fans supporting them when they are so clearly triggering for rape victims. Humor, throughout history and more and more now, is crucial to the healing and happiness of a group or individual. A coping mechanism; for when your country is in turmoil or when you accidentally drive an hour in the wrong direction.

The idea of everything having the potential for humor is nice and  in my opinion semi-valid, and of course there are jokes that are just cheap laughs and ones that are more purposefully formulated, but even if only one victim of sexual assault said "hey I don't like this" nobody should be working so hard to defend themselves. In the comments on related youtube videos, thousands of people debate on whether or not these jokes are funny. What is the motive for someone to continue to defend a 40 second joke as funny and morally sound if somebody who is the butt of the joke is upset by it? Of course, the youtube comment section is consistently terrifying and confusing. It isn't a reliable source for what people really think as they are mostly looking for reactions, so they're not worried about the effects of what they say. The same could be said for some comedians being careless in pursuit of a strong reaction and attention. Sure, there is no bad publicity and I can applaud them for trying to advance their careers and be "edgy", but for what one joke may do to someone else, it's not always worth it. Author Molly Ivins said “Satire is traditionally the weapon of the powerless against the powerful. I only aim at the powerful. When satire is aimed at the powerless, it is not only cruel—it’s vulgar.”

I've never liked Daniel Tosh much and here is an example of a joke which trivializes something that should never be trivialized. This bit from Dave Chapelle may err on a slightly more acceptable kind of joke in that he does not ignore the psychological affect rape has and brings up that men can be and are affected as well which is seldom discussed.

Pride and Prejudice in the Facebook Era

Visit the Facebook pages for the following characters from Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice:

Darcy

Mrs. Bennett

Elizabeth

Miss Bingley

Charlotte

Mary

Lydia

Satire-o-rama

Futurama has ranked as one of my all time favorite tv shows ever since I started watching it when I was in about sixth or seventh grade.  It is absolutely hilarious, and it owes much of its hilarity to satire.  The show is constantly poking fun at the way things are currently in the US often by portraying their long term effects in the future.  Here's an example: 

This minute long clip features Al Gore as a taxi driver, which I think can be classified as either hyperbole or situational irony.  It would be hyperbole because it is taking Gore's declining career and saying it's going to go as low as a taxi driver, which is probably not going to happen no matter how much relevance he loses.  It can also be argued that his presence is situational irony because when Bender gets in the cab, the audience expects some stereotypical cab driver but instead gets a famous politician.  The "Hybraxi" that Gore uses is a parody of Gore's interests in a way because he is an environmentalist, and his general incompetence behind the wheel is hyperbole that exaggerates his shortcomings as a politician and the general view of Gore to be a goofy guy.  Then there is the situational irony of the bridge, where the hybraxi goes up and then comes down the same way it came despite all of our previous experience with this tv/movie trope.  Finally, it ends on the 100 dollar gallon of gas line, which is hyperbole of rising gas prices.

That's quite a bit of satire for just one minute of footage, isn't it?  There's a point to it too!  The general statement of the clip is that we should listen to Al Gore (Well, maybe not specifically Al Gore, but people with Al Gore's ideas).  Despite the fact that he can be a tad buffoonish and shows severe maladroitness in the clip, we know that he was right about the environment and whatnot because a gallon of gas costs $100.  We shouldn't reduce his career to that of a taxi driver when he is correct about the direction of the planet.  Do you want to spend $100 dollars on gas?  The creators of Futurama don't, and neither do I thanks to their clever use of satire.

SNL

Along with Key & Peele, Saturday Night Live also uses satire heavily in their skits. Saturday Night live has been running for over thirty years and has gotten many awards so it is obvious that they are pretty good with satire. SNL often uses satire to mock current events, including a lot of political events. Here is a skit from around the time of the 2008 presidential election that mocks an interview Sarah Palin did with Katie Couric.

A Modern Proposal

Daniel Tosh is a comedian who has a show on Comedy Central called Tosh.0 and he also does stand up. Tosh's stand up show Completely Serious is a great example of satire. While on stage he acts like an entitled rich celebrity, but is actually down to earth and really smart.


Tosh's comedy is a little twisted and inappropriate, but it does have a purpose. Tosh gets people to look at how stupid some stereotypes are and how outrageous some things people do are. A lot of his skits on Comedy Central dig deeper into problems dealing with the government, race and feminism. It isn't obvious at first, but when you start to read between the lines you can see that Tosh is trying to teach people that stereotypes aren't always true and are usually just hyperbole.


Tosh himself is an example of how unreliable stereotypes are. On his show he hints at being gay, but then hints at being straight. Maybe he is just bisexual, or maybe he is trying to make a point. I think that he is trying to show how people automatically stereotype others even when they do not know the first thing about them.


Tosh is just one of many satirical comedians in today's day and age. Him along with Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are paving the way for satirical humor.

Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, and Successful Satire

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Sex, Scandal, and Satire

Mike Nichols's The Graduate follows the story of Benjamin Braddock and his attempt to discover adulthood and the options that are presented for him after college when he is intercepted by an affair with predatory neighbor Mrs. Robinson. An American classic, The Graduate effectively entertains its audience with multidimensional character developments between Benjamin, Mrs. Robinson, and Elaine, while also satirizing the the upper-middle-class society of Southern California during the 1960s. 

Mike Nichols, though often times too quick to jump to the easier one-liner, uses irony to skillfully parallel the almost childlike behavior of the adults in the film with the anxiety of the young bachelor (Benjamin) trying to work out his future. In doing so, Nichols projected a very loose and provocative environment that enabled the audience to understand the flaws in this adult society that perpetuated youthful and immature behavior. 

Benjamin served as the principle character that contrasted with the rest of the world around him, including his parents. Mrs. Robinson and her daughter, Elaine, represented the two paths Benjamin could have chosen as a graduate. By starting his affair with Mrs. Robinson, Benjamin unknowingly entered what he assumed to be the "adult" world, or rather the world that the adults in the film existed in. The humor, however, is that this adulthood that Benjamin experienced is actually quite childish. The adults in Ben's life are associated with luxury, parties, and relaxed attitudes. No one other than Benjamin seems to care about the future. Even so, sex was a rather new experience for Benjamin and therefore he is all to quick to see his affair with Mrs. Robinson as extremely scandalous for the upper-middle-class society, let alone a young boy.

Benjamin: Look, maybe we could do something else together. Mrs. Robinson, would you like to go to a movie? 

Then there is Elaine. Elaine serves as the promising adulthood that Benjamin sought out to acquire by the end of the film. Again, the humor is found where Elaine is the only other non-adult in the movie, yet she is by far the most mature individual in the film. If my explanation of the irony used is not enough, I advise you to watch the movie. It's truly hilarious. 

Though there are satirical elements found in The Graduate, I think that the concentration is not to make a large or very impactful commentary on society in the way most satires do. I think that surely Nichols and the actors tried to create a film that allowed the audience to connect in their own respective worlds, however the humor was majorly based on sexual innuendos and awkward interactions that were not constructed through satire. Therefore, this movie is more generally a romantic comedy with satirical elements, however most romantic comedies are that as well. 

Benjamin: Mrs. Robinson, I can't do this anymore.
Mrs. Robinson: You what?
Benjamin: This is all terribly wrong.
Mrs. Robinson: Do you find me undesirable?
Benjamin: Oh no, Mrs. Robinson, I think, I think you are the most attractive of all my parents' friends. I mean that!

Predictable and Cliche

When it comes to movie selections, romantic comedies are probably last on my list. As we were told to blog about one of our favorites or a discussion of a rom-com, my mind was truly blank. I could not remember the last romantic comedy I liked, more so even remember watching. But then it came to me that just last weekend, as my friends and I sat on the couch doing nothing, we put on a random movie on Netflix. I now realize that this was a clear romantic comedy, and as bad as the movie was, our boredom led us to watch the entire film. This may have been the most cliche and predictable movie in recent history, but nonetheless it was a rom-com. Camp Takota starts off with a mid-20's woman with a 'big' job opportunity coming up and her wedding in the coming weeks. But as a five year old could have predicted, everything goes wrong. She ends up losing her job because of a social media scandal, and when she comes home that day to tell her fiance, she walks in on him with another woman. But luckily for her, she had just walked into an old camp director on the street who offered her to go be a counselor. So good for her, she gives this lady a call after her horrible life changing day, and plans to leave for the camp the next day. As she arrives at the camp, it is a dud of a camp with only two other counselors and no cell phone service. But as she steps out of the car, she makes eye contact with one of the only two guys at the camp, absolute shocker. So as the movie continues, she becomes best friends with the counselors, and comes to know this guy she saw. Now, toward the end, she gets a message delivered that her boss wants to give her job back. Uh oh, Dilemma!! does she stay or does she go? Well she starts for the bus, but as she gets there, turns around and stays at camp. Now on the last night of camp, her and her new "boyfriend" are talking to the kids. Out of nowhere, the ex-boyfriend runs from out of the woods, wow. He encounters Elise, but her new boyfriend steps in, and a fight proceeds. The old boyfriend then runs away, and shortly after, it is clear that Elise and her new guy will be together for a while. This type of movie, the most predictable of all, seems to me a classic rom-com. Although somewhat entertaining, I would say rom-coms are not my favorite! Too predictable and cliche, almost all rom-coms like this one do not catch my eye. I feel like it is hard to make a memorable or unique romantic comedy. But as I am not a frequent rom-com watcher, I do not have many movies to base my characterizations on.

Silver Linings Playbook

While I am not the biggest romantic comedy watcher or expert, I thought that the movie Silver Linings Playbook was an interesting movie and transcends many of the negative connotations of romantic comedies that have been shared on the blog. The movie features Bradley Cooper, in the movie named Patrick, and Jennifer Lawrence, named Tiffany. While the movie opens with Patrick being released from a psychiatric hospital for his bipolar disorder, he moves back in with his parents and is determined to win back his former wife. In the process, he meets the widow Tiffany, who offers to help him win his wife back if he competes in a dance competition with her. Pat and Tiffany are able to develop an odd friendship through their shared neuroses, which progresses as they spend more time together. The plot immediately reveals the complexity in the film that many romantic comedies stereotypically lack. Although it may appear predictable of what is "inevitably" going to happen as Pat and Tiffany hang out more, their unique characters do not allow for a foreseeable ending. Casey mentioned on her post that despite the predictability in romantic comedies, they thrive in society because we are familiar with them and they are comforting. I feel as though Silver Linings Playbook creates the same intriguing effect, but with a story line that is not traditional to romantic comedies.

Additionally, while throughout the movie Pat is chasing his wife and he ends up leaving his pursuit for Tiffany, which may have been expected, I don't think it matters. Sure, maybe it fell into the stereotype of a romantic comedy, but it was funny and entertaining. I think that sometimes people get caught up in trying to evaluate what genres or stereotypes movies fall into and judging them based on that, often forgetting if they liked the movie or not. While Silver Linings Playbook was a unique romantic comedy, I think it was enjoyable just as a movie.

Tbt to the Trampoline

As many of you probably remember, last year a group of students issued their own form of satire, better known as the Trampoline. For those of you that don't remember, it was a pretty blatant satire making fun of the Trapeze, which for those of you that don't know, is our school newspaper (check it out). While it managed to poke fun at a lot of aspects of the Trapeze, the main message emphasized the fact that Trapeze does not cover the most relevant, relatable, read-worthy topics and stories. If you can recall, the "Point- Counter Point" of the Trampoline was something along the lines of "Should lunch table trays be orange or blue???" which describes it all pretty well. 

As an editor of the Trapeze, many people asked me if I was offended by this blatant message to which I  replied honestly that I was not at all. In fact, none of the editors were and this is mostly because we completely agreed with it. Satires have the ability to send a powerful message and in many cases to spark a reason for change. While the entire editorial board agreed and laughed along with the Trampoline, it made me wonder why our goal of making the Trapeze more socially relevant was so out of reach.  

Each month, we scramble to come up with new story ideas however, more often than not, we are limited to what we are able to write about because of fear of crossing a line that shouldn't be crossed. It's a constant battle that takes place whenever the topic of racial quality, politics, or really any other topic that is not completely safe and agreeable by the entire school. With the recent events of Ferguson, as a school paper geared to represent the diverse student body, we initially felt that this was an event that could not go unnoticed. But as an editorial board consisting entirely of white girls, we unanimously agreed that were not in a position to address it. No matter how strongly we felt about the recent news or how badly we desired a change, we couldn't pretend that we felt the same emotions as those who were suffering or even those that we in a much better place to relate to it than we were. And while I completely agreed that we can't for a second pretend that we can address these topics with the same level of credibility, I think that the fact that we are unable to acknowledge such profound and relevant issues says a lot more about the way that we address racial profiling as a society. As goes for a lot societal issues including racial profiling and gender inequality, acknowledgment is the first step to change. Change won't happen if only a select few feel comfortable talking about it but somehow, our ability to acknowledge something is limited by our race which can impede our ability to move forward in terms of a school newspaper or an entire society in general. 

oprfhs.tumblr.com

One of the best examples of satire I've ever come across probably wouldn't be funny to anyone who hasn't stepped (or known someone who's stepped) into OPRF's double doors at least one time in their life. OPRF's tumblr page was made by some anonymous hero who decided to make a mockery of our school bulletins on a daily basis. It's formatted in exactly the same way as the originals, but don't be fooled-there's not a single serious line anywhere to be found. The Clubs Corner section is filled with things like Time Travel Club gone missing, Arson and Book Burning Club, and Mustard Club (whose slogan is "we will cover this earth in a blanket of yellow"...) College Callers has had the College of Universities, the College of Mist and Shadow, Alcatraz, and the University of Michigan. Apparently we've just survived a Zombie Apocalypse, too. It just keeps going.

During class today we were asked to question why we were laughing at the things we were, and this site shows that satire often hits home because it's familiar to us, If I showed a post or two to a Fenwick kid they'd probably laugh at some of the jokes in each post, but they wouldn't be able to fully appreciate the page as they aren't familiar with all the Husky vices and virtues the author make fun of. They wouldn't understand the humor, so they wouldn't laugh as much. It's clear to see that satire is often rooted in familiarity.

http://oprfhs.tumblr.com/

If you haven't stumbled upon this site yet, PLEASE please go there. And we really should get the author a fruit basket. Or a Nobel Prize.

I Can't Believe Someone Hasn't Already Brought This Up

Two words: Monty Python.

Perhaps one of the most iconic, relatively-contemporary examples of satire is the famous and infamous Monty Python. His works, including Life of Brian and The Search for the Holy Grail have become legendary for their clever use of satirical humor, from hyperbolic plots to understated and sarcastic one-liners.

A few of my favorite examples are as follows, for those of you who need a reminder or have yet to witness the glorious satirical hilarity that Monty Python brings to the world:

1. During Life of Brian, at the end of the film, the main characters are being pinned to crosses to die. So, naturally, they begin to sing the now well-known song, "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life." Optimism and life while one is about to be crucified? If there's not a horrendous irony to that then I have no grasp of what irony is.

2. The great and fabulous King Arthur in Holy Grail traverses the kingdom while on his quest, and finds that the peasants have no idea who he is or even where he is from, and as he tries to assert his authority they question the fact that his "noble steed" is merely a lackey clapping coconuts together. Not only that but King Arthur consistently forgets the number three when he counts. This exaggerated view of royalty is not only amusing, but reveals the facade that is the royal system.

3. Later in Holy Grail is the scene known most commonly by its featured item: The Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch. This hand grenade is supposedly blessed by God and an elaborate religious speech is required to use it, before one "may blow thine enemies to bits, in thy mercy." In the movie, it is used to blow up a demon rabbit who annihilates all who challenge it in a bloody massacre. The rabbit is an ironic enemy, whose demise is brought on by the exaggerated and ironic Holy Hand Grenade in one of my favorite movie scenes of all time.

There are countless other examples, but I think if anyone is looking for a spectacular example of satire, Monty Python is definitely the place to look.

Rom Com? Or Tragedy?

In Shakespeare's time, at the end of a tragedy most of characters die and at the end of a comedy there is a marriage. So with this in mind, a traditional comedy would be a romantic comedy. As some other posts mentioned, people like rom-coms because they are predictable and familiar which makes us comfortable and happy. I agree with these comments but I think these characteristics can also apply tragedies.

The romance in tragedies  are also based on clichés as the romance in rom coms are. After Romeo and Juliette, stories of forbidden love from two feuding families have run rampant. So has the story of a couple dying for their love for each other.

So if romantic tragedies and comedies both share cliché stories, why does the comedy make us laugh? Well, there are different circumstances and the dialogues of characters would be more witty and funny. But I think also because of the satire included in romantic comedy. Situations are over exaggerated and there are various types of irony. Satire makes us laugh because we see the ways in which it accurately in portrays reality and how sometimes reality can be naturally comical. 

Rom coms end with the more optimistic option possible for the situation. Rom coms usually maintain an overall optimistic attitude throughout the entire story. In tragedies, there are moments of optimism but the outcome of the romance is usually a less optimal option . 

Although, romantic comedies share some structural similarities to romantic tragedies, the biggest difference is the way the stories make us feel.      

What are YOU laughing at?

In class we talked about "The Onion", "America's Finest News Source", and the pens "for her" (which if you act now, you ladies can get them yourselves for only $10!) and why we find things so funny. "The Onion" is a perfect example of a satire it makes fun of real news sources and makes up funny stories to make you laugh at how ridiculously true some of them are. One of their articles, "Teenage Girl Blossoming Into Beautiful Object", makes us laugh at how ridiculous, but sadly true, this article is. By exaggerating their points, people find things like this funny. I think it's because they laugh at how brutally honest this article is. Some of the theories that the above linked article mentions is:

1. The Superiority Theory: "we learn a lot about humor on the playground, where taunts and teases produce laughter for the masses but shame and embarrassment for an unlucky few"
2. The Incongruity and Incongruity-Resolution Theories: "humor happens when there is an incongruity between what we expect and what actually happens"
3. The Benign Violation Theory: "we laugh when something is violated — like morals, social codes, linguistic norms, or personal dignity — but the violation isn't threatening"
4. The Mechanical Theory: "inadaptability or rigidity — the repetitive nature of our personalities — that is the source of humor"
5. The Release Theory: "Freud thought that hilarity and laughter were reactions we produce in order to release sexual or aggressive tension"

Culture or Stereotypes? & In Defense of Romantic Comedies

Culture or Stereotypes?

When we watched the clip from the Chappelle's Show in class, I wondered whether percussion plays a large role in black culture.  For the rest of the day, I thought about whether my comment in class asserting that it does was perpetuating a stereotype. I knew, however that the idea of a black culture did exist because I recently read Hilton Als's new book White Girls which includes essays on black culture (it also includes a response to the Virginia Woolf essay "Shakespeare's Sister" in the voice of Richard Pryor's fictitious, porn-star sister), so I wondered where culture ends and stereotype begins.

When I got home, I immediately looked up "black culture" and found a Wikipedia page about it.  The music section of the page mentioned that percussion is a central element of historically and culturally black music.  I was relieved when I read this but was then confused about what stereotype was being made fun of in the clip.  I came to the conclusion that it was "black people are unable to resist a beat." I think this was lost on me while viewing the clip because I was unaware of that stereotype. Please comment if you have anything to add because I still do not feel completely sure I am correct and wonder what other people think.

In Defense of Romantic Comedies

Romantic comedy films are often trivialized as "rom-coms" or "chick-flicks," the cinematic equivalent of the pejorative "clit-lit."  Because these films are often female-centric or because the films are more geared toward "feminine" interests, they are dismissed by our patriarchal society.  This is not to say that everyone who dislikes romantic comedies is a misogynist, but I think that on a larger cultural level, it is a valid explanation.  People dismissive of these films often suggest that the films rely on the same tropes and structure; that they are generic.  It is important, however to recognize the difference between a film being generic and belonging to a genre and to question whether romantic comedies truly are more often generic than movies of other genres.

The difference reminds me of the literary "genre debate," which is about whether there is a significant difference between genre fiction and literary fiction.  In the more conservative view, genre fiction is lowbrow while literary fiction is highbrow; genre fiction is not art while literary fiction is; genre fiction is easily categorized while literary fiction defies categorization.  This definition leads to the dismissal of books that are easily categorized as mystery, romance, fantasy, queer, adventure, science fiction, or crime novels despite their individual merits.  This is hard to navigate because many great novels fit into these categories.  Pride and Prejudice is a canonical novel that is easily categorized as a romance novel.  Does that mean it is an example of genre fiction?  Most people would say it does not.  It seems to me that at its core the "genre fiction" discussed in opposition to literary fiction is not fiction that belongs to a genre but rather fiction that is generic.  Unfortunately, by using the word genre, literatis have created a stigma around what really is genre fiction: fiction that either is not based in reality or is not of interest to straight males.  

Here are some of my favorite romantic comedy films (or maybe more accurately, films that are at times both romantic and comedic):

• The Royal Tenenbaums
• Jules et Jim
• Harold and Maude
• Stolen Kisses
• Une Femme Est Une Femme
• Broadcast News
• The Lady Eve
• Annie Hall
• The Importance of Being Earnest
• Something Wild

Change!!!

After talking about satire in class today, I couldn't help but to think of the Comedy Central show, South Park. The creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, are satirical kings with what they do with South Park. Although the show is extremely explicit, it has a lot of meaning behind all of the F-bombs. In one episode, they focus on the presidential election of Barack Obama in 2008. Specifically, using hyperbole of the general population to his campaign slogans "Change" and "Yes we can." In the episode, the entire town's democratic population is out partying on the streets with signs that say "Change." One of the main characters, Randy, cusses out his own boss saying that he doesn't need his job anymore because Obama is bringing change. The party eventually gets out of hand leading to the tipping of a cop car. So why is this funny to us? Although it is an exaggeration, it is kind of true. A lot of people reacted this way to some degree. I think this episode was made to somewhat criticize the whole country and how they reacted, both democrats and republicans.

In the episode, while the democrats are out partying the republicans are fearing that the country is doomed because of the new president. They are all trying to hide out in a bunker and arguing over who gets in and who doesn't; looking like something out of an "end of the world" scenario. Once again over-exaggerating the public's reaction to Obama winning.

I Object!

Aside from the generally formulaic story structure and predictable endings, it is shocking how many romantic comedies mistake creepy romantic gestures as actual romance. One of the biggest examples of this is the whole "running to stop someones wedding at the last minute to tell them that you love them" trope. It happens in so many movies. Just off the top of my head there's The Graduate, Shrek, Wedding Crashers, A Philadelphia Story, The Sweetest Thing, Made of Honor, and Runaway Bride. It's not just a coincidence that this trope recurs so often in movies. In romantic comedies that climax is always the one main character finally working u the nerve to do some big romantic gesture and finally say "I love you" or "lets get married". This has lead to the popularization of the "Don't marry that person!" trope, because people see it somehow as the ultimate expression of love to destroy other love. As if love is somehow a finite resource and there's some sort of zero sum trade off dynamic in the world of romance.

In all these movies you have people all set to get married and start a life together, when someone rushes in and gives some big eloquent speech about how much they love the person who is getting married. As if that's all that goes into love, big sweeping romantic gestures. In romantic comedies you have people who presumably have had a relationship together for at least some time. They are happy together, so much so that they decided to get married. Yet they decide to throw it all away in an instant as if the only thing that matters in romance is who can express their feelings in the grandest way. The couple getting married has presumably already gone through some stuff together, they presumably love each other. Yet all of that is meaningless when some yahoo comes barging in shouting "I object!". When these characters, these "protagonists", storm into someone's wedding with professions of love it's actually really creepy.  They make it seem as if that is what a real relationship is and it isn't. A relationship is more about how you feel about someone the rest of time, when they aren't waxing on about how great you are. Anyone can be won over by some big speech but that can't be your entire relationship. That is what makes the trope so creepy. Somehow barging in and ruining someone's happy and presumably love filled relationship for some spur of the moment fling thing is seen as good, as romantic.

A Modest Proposal...

In 1729, Ireland was in an awful state due to its struggles with England. The Irish people were doing little to help themselves. Children needed precious food to be raised, and did not help the country when they grew up as they either emigrated or turned to a life of crime. Jonathan Swift saw the problem, and knew how to make it come to the forefront of the country's conversation: satire. Swift wrote "A Modest Proposal: For preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being Aburden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public."

In case you don't feel like opening/reading that link, here's a quick rundown: Swift suggests that the solution to feeding the poor and preventing them from becoming a burden to society is to sell and eat the children. Of course he wasn't serious, he was satirizing the condition his country was in, and how little people were doing to fix it. While people were upset by Swift's suggestion-- arguing that killing and eating children was wrong-- they were simultaneously letting poor families, children included, starve.

While Swift didn't exactly solve the problems, and a ton of people died during the Great Potato Famine afterwards, his satire still attracted a lot of attention at the time. So yeah, pay attention to satire.

The Romantic Comedy Paradox

I have never really been a huge fan of romantic comedies, and after our brief discussion today it got me thinking as to why I have always strayed away from them. Megan’s post about clichés reminded me that almost every classic romantic comedy seems to have a similar plot. For example, two people who hardly know each other meet in some unique way. They fall in love and everything seems to be going great until something happens and these two people distance themselves from one another. At the end of the film, the couple runs into each other again (most of the time by coincidence) and they become close again.

I think this is why romantic comedies have never really caught my interest: the ending is usually pretty predictable. However, there are always going to be a few books or movies that stray from the cliché, which is why those stories tend to become fairly unknown (and don’t make as much money).

I agree with what Casey mentioned about familiarity leading to comfort. It seems like a lot of people like romantic comedies because they are predictable. We tend to stray away from things that are different but at the same time we look down on things that are the same. I guess what I’m getting at is that romantic comedies reinforce this paradox. A rom-com that follows the classic plot will make more money and have more success overall, but it most likely will not get as much appreciation as a unique one.

Also, I apologize if this post was all over the place (and if I offended anyone).

Black Ice

While we were watching the skit about Obama's anger translator today, it reminded me of a similar Key and Peele skit that hits home some of the same points. The Black Ice skit offers a satirical spin on some of the stereotypes that are prevalent about black men in Light in August and current events.

I think that this skit perfectly outlines some of the racial profiling that occurs today and that we saw happen in Light in August. The news reporters represent many members of the community in the novel. They viewed Joe as a threat, reckless, and as a savage. Similarly, the community members did their best to steer clear of Joe and whenever they were around him they felt threatened. Just like the reporters in this skit, Joe felt misjudged. He was viewed as a savage when he had done nothing to make the community think he was one.

This skit also outlines some of the racial profiling that happens today. When the reporters describe black ice as dark, scary, suspicious and evil, they are hinting at the way black people, especially men, are portrayed in today's society. The reporters highlight that many people in modern society are quick to judge others and fall back on a stereotypical narrative to justify their feelings. While society has certainly progressed, the recent headlines show that issues with race and racial profiling still exist today. While this skit offers no solution to the problem, I think it is a comical way to reflect on and analyze some of the issues that are prevalent in Light in August and current events.

Communities : Label Makers

A community is a world of its own.  It may have different opinions than those surrounding it or it may have similar beliefs but either way it is held together in a union of beliefs that are passed on to newcomers and imprinted into childrens malleable brains.  In society different communities have different cultures that establish language, opinions, and stereotypes that everyone is assumed to follow.  Some community’s work to dissipate the idea of stereotypes.  For example in the New Haven community they have a workshop for children to raise awareness of what stereotypes are and how to get rid of them.  According to an article in The New Haven Register, “The workshop will focus on how negative stereotypes of black people are hurting the children, how and why stereotypes were invented, and what parents and other caregivers can do to destroy those stereotypes and help heal the wounds they inflict.” In other instances communities hold on to the stereotypes given to race or gender and pass them on to their children, only to continue the vicious cycle.

Within Light in August community plays a significant role in shaping the thoughts of its persons.  In the town Jefferson, the two stereotypes passed down throughout the community are Racism and Gender relations.  In Light in August what I find interesting is the demonstration of how if one believes differently than the community how they are exiled.  Hightower believes and acts contrary to how the community believes and acts.  Hightower is said to have relationships with his black servants and has a unsuccessful relationship with his wife.  Both of these make an impression on the community and they respond by trying to make him leave.  Why does he stay?? Hightower is threatened, attacked, and shunned, yet he stays in Jefferson.  I think that his place in society has become his identity.  

Hightower takes on the identity of the outsider of the town, just as other identities are given to the different members.  When Lena arrives the community deems her the bad woman, just as when Christmas’s true racial confusion is addressed he is deemed as the violent black man. Both Lena and Christmas were judged upon only their physical appearance, Lena arriving with a pregnant stomach and no man, and Christmas with a slightly darker skin tone.  In Lena’s case her identity was less desirable whereas Christmas was struggling to accept an identity being racially mixed.  I think that Hightower, even though chosen to be an outsider, was comfortable in Jefferson because he was given an identity which is something that people strive to gain.  Within a community one might be searching for their identity however, once it is given sometimes it is less desirable.  Communities are organizations that label people with identities and stereotypes, it is hard to deviate from the path that a community has chosen for you if you remain there.

"Once Upon a Romantic Comedy:" Coming Soon to Theaters Near You

In her blog post, Megan mentioned that clichés, although somewhat bland, can connect people on the basis of shared experience. I completely agree with her argument, and it really got me thinking: why else do we use clichés?

For many people, familiarity equals comfort, and comfort equals happiness. I’ve been in my best friend's basement probably over 500 times over the years, so I’m familiar with the surroundings. Thus, I feel comfortable when I walk in- I know where everything is and I’m prepared for her cat to pop out from behind the couch any minute. Due to this strong sense of security, I’m happy when I’m there.

In my opinion, watching and reading romantic comedies processes in the mind in a similar manner. These types of texts have long been criticized for being giant clichés- the characters, the plot, and even the setting seem almost exactly the same in each one, compared with others made around the same time. Many Americans (men especially) ridicule these works, calling them “dumb,” “boring,” etc.

But why, then, are these books and movies so popular in America? Why did almost every girl at my summer camp in sixth grade say that 27 Dresses was her favorite movie? Why did my friends and I describe the young adult fiction novels we picked up at Borders as “the best book, like, ever?” Here’s my best answer: they’re familiar. We’ve been exposed to those cliché plots, characters, and settings so many times that they become permanently familiar to us. Then, exactly like stepping into your best friend’s basement the 478th time, we begin to feel comfortable with what we’re watching. We’ll know exactly what to expect and we can pretty much predict the ending within the first five minutes of the movie or five pages of the book. Thus, we’re happy while watching it or reading it- we can sit back, relax, and enjoy the dullness dancing in front of our faces, knowing that we’re not in for any surprises.

My guess is that filmmakers and authors know that our brains tend to work this way, and that’s why they continue to make so many darn movies and books that are laughably similar. They know making something familiar will make them money.

$$$$$$$

Feel free to disagree with me if you’d like, but it’s just my opinion. Also, I’m sorry if I insulted anyone’s taste in books or movies.

'The Boss' Earned His Name

Since as early as I can remember, I've been a 'Bruce Fan'. Whether we were headed for the local supermarket or a long road trip to PA, he's been there with us. By the transitive property of mother-daughter relations, I've developed my mom's love for the Boss and his music.

However, it was not until tonight, as I watched the televised tribute to Bruce Springsteen with my parents, that I realized his brilliance beyond the world of music. We watched Jackson Brown cover Bruce's "41 Shots" from 1999. His single was inspired by the 1999 police shooting of Amadou Diallo. The familiarity of this case forced me to research a little more about the case itself. This is what I found:

The Shooting of Amadou Diallo occurred on February 4, 1999, when Amadou Diallo, a 23-year-old immigrant from Guinea, was shot and killed by four New York City Police Department plain-clothed officers: Sean Carroll, Richard Murphy, Edward McMellon and Kenneth Boss, who fired a combined total of 41 shots, 19 of which struck Diallo, outside his apartment at 1157 Wheeler Avenue in the Soundview section of The Bronx. The four were part of the now-defunct Street Crimes Unit. All four officers were charged with second-degree murder and acquitted at trial in Albany, New York.[1]

Diallo was unarmed at the time of the shooting, and a firestorm of controversy erupted subsequent to the event as the circumstances of the shooting prompted outrage both within and outside New York City. Issues such as police brutality, racial profiling, and contagious shooting were central to the ensuing controversy.

Then I found he performed the same song in tribute to Treyvon Martin. Here's what I found on this case:

On the night of February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida, United States, George Zimmerman fatally shot Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old African American high school student. Zimmerman, a 28-year-old mixed-race Hispanic man,[Note 1] was the neighborhood watch coordinator for the gated community where Martin was temporarily living and where the shooting took place. Zimmerman was accused of being motivated by racism[4][144] and of having racially profiled Martin.

And now, the issue in Ferguson.

Bruce's genius does not lie in the fact that he is conscious of the corrupt system in which racial profiling is the cause of death. Rather, it is in his music that his genius is illuminated. His music, containing beautiful and universal characteristics, alone acts as a symbolic resistance to the forces that divide our community. A master of his craft, Bruce has never failed me. Today, he inspires me to not be passive, and make a splash however way fits me best.

Don't Wanna Take My 6 Finals

I have six finals. Seniors shouldn't have six finals.

The ending of Light in August, for me, was actually pretty well done. It flowed well with the rest of the novel; including new characters, mentioning (or implying rather) sex, and traveling (or running away). The furniture salesman was an interesting yet incredibly random character to include, and it is this sense of randomness that makes Faulkner a solid writer. If a person were to read the first chapter and the last chapter of Light in August, they would think the story is solely about Lena. However, if you read all the chapters except the first and the last, you would have an altogether different view of Lena.

Of course race is a subject that can't be avoided when contemplating this book. Even in modern day America, the land of the "free", we find that our racial system isn't even remotely close to being perfect. Nor will it ever be. BUT, we can certainly try to achieve that goal in which people aren't judged for their heritage; or for that matter their sexuality, gender, height, hair color, sport, religion, fashion etc. The world is ever changing and ever terrifying- we should strive to make it a better and easier world for the generations to come.

Favorite Satire Ever (I don't even know if its satire, its just absolutely hilarious)

Insert Overused Title Here

Cliches are very unappreciated in today's culture.  They are considered to have less power in literature, film, and art.  No one wants to hear the same story again and again, copy-and-pasted with only new names for the characters.  And don't you dare write about a cliche in your college essays; it's a sure way to make yourself sound uninteresting, wallflower-esque -- basically unwantable.  But what about when I feel that a cliche describes my feelings perfectly?  What happens when hearing that hit pop song (despite not being my genre at all) evokes an eerie sense of deja vu?  Does that feeling no longer have power because it's been expressed countless times before?  Did Frankl's dependence on his wife's love alone lack power because of the lack of depth in his needs?

While I agree that we have to push ourselves to find new depths beyond the cliche, especially in the way we express ourselves through mediums like words and pictures, sometimes cliches actually are accurate descriptions no matter how worn out the concept is.  And it's not fair to only allow cliches in such extreme cases as Frankl's; in fact, what applies in the extreme cases should be insight into everyday life.  One of the reasons that people reject cliches is that they are not original, that they do not reflect the unique characteristics of each individual.  For that reason it's necessary to not solely rely on cliches.  However, cliches do reflect an undeniable shared human experience.  It's okay to grapple for deeper comparisons than cliches most of the time, but I think that ever once in a while it is okay to embrace them and to thus embrace the aspects of life that connect us to each other.

Affirmative, Yes. Comprehensive, Hardly. (Fixing Affirmative Action)

The Light in August is as profound an exposé on the inner workings of racial perception as any psychological treatise. While Faulkner seems to have debunked the great 'mystery of race', I struggle in class to understand how I can apply his revelations to my everyday life. I've decided to examine a current racial issue and attempt to apply Faulkner's genius...


America boasts freedom. Equally present -- but not so fun to shout about from your rooftop -- is the degree of inequality that results. Today, the United States' government takes steps to make up for these injustices.

By examining Affirmative Action in the college admission process -- one attempt at righting past wrongs -- I will address two questions: How are we currently seeking to remedy injustice, and how can we better this process?

Affirmative action has been in place in the United States since the 1960’s, when it was first introduced to enforce compliance with civil rights laws. The policy was intended to help minorities who have been discriminated against, especially in employment and educational settings.

Colleges throughout the nation favor those minorities who in the past, have suffered injustices at the hands of the United States' government. In this way, the government seeks to level the playing field by giving those who have been denied opportunities the chance to recoup their status.

We will overlook the arguments against Affirmative Action's practical fallacies (For example, favoring minorities presupposes their inferiority; opportunities are being taken away from qualifies members of the majority; these favored kids are unprepared for the rigor at the universities to which they are admitted) and focus on the big picture.


The basis of this system is far from perfect, and Faulkner sheds a light onto its problem. 

Here is the crux of my argument:

Faulkner pins race as the single most dividing quality in American history, because it's the most visual, clear-cut option by which people can be alienated. But he deliberately makes a point to emphasize that this is but one of many factors, including gender, religion, school of thought, and social status/wealth, based on which people differentiate themselves and discriminate.

Each one of these factors has been the basis for injustice in American history. 

So, in my opinion, the United States needs to either take all these factors into account (in proportion to their documented effect on need for favor in the college admission process) when evaluating need for favor in the college admission process, or take none. To only consider race is to deny the existence of divisions in society based on factors other than race.

On a more reprehensive note,

By failing to recognize the link between prejudice and those human differentiations other than race, the United States government jeopardizes the authenticity of the apologetic sentiment at the core of Affirmative Action. 

Affirmative Action has been enacted as a reactionary measure to appease 1960's civil rights activism.
If a government is unwilling to right wrongs other than those for which it has been vilified, is it truly seeking justice, or is it simply defending its reputation?





*I am aware that this 'all-factor' plan is quite idealistic.
As a step towards the 'all-factor' plan, an amendment that has a greater chance of being enacted is Affirmative-Economic-Need Action (ENA). While not as comprehensive as the all-factor plan, its measure of wealth in addition to race for the determination of need for favor in the college admissions process more adeptly evaluates need for favor than Affirmative Action because the biggest dividers in America today are race and class.

Jumping to Conclusions

As we have discussed in class, there are many unsettling parallels between Light in August, and the current racial problems in America, including Ferguson. The town of Jefferson in Faulkner's Light in August immediately believed that because Christmas had potentially black heritage, he was the murderer and not Joe Brown. The townspeople someohow instantaneously knew that he had done it, before they had evidence or details. Of course, it is likely that Christmas did commit the murder, but he did not do under the circumstances that the townspeople believed he did. In fact, it could be argued that he did so in self defense. But of course, no one would believe that a black man killed an older white lady in self defense. The question now is, how do we as a society avoid making the same erroneous conclusions?

Well, I would advise people to keep an open mind until all of the evidence is seen or heard. It is difficult to recognize some of the stereotypes that we have unconsciously internalized from an early age, but we must recognize them to be able to overcome them. Racial stereotypes play a large role in unfair racial profiling. Unfortunately misreading the situation due to prejudice can lead to innocent deaths, as seen in too many cases in the past few years. The people of Jefferson judged Christmas too quickly by the his alleged black heritage. The saw him differently when they were told he was a black man. They no longer saw him as a suspect, they saw him as a murderer. We cannot let America make the same mistake.

"Thank God You're Here Sir!"

   Think back to the last time you were walking down the street or driving in your car and saw a policeman. What thoughts were going through your head? Have you ever been genuinely glad that an officer was standing there? Or even been appreciative towards what they are doing with their service? This is where I believe the problem lies, that people are disconnected from the police specifically and enter situations with them in a negative way from the start, and for good reason. Fireman come and stop our houses from burning, ambulances come when we are hurt, and policemen come when something is wrong.

   But this disconnect stems from not just the recent actions of officers, but from the way they respond to them. Officer Wilson killed an unarmed black male in the line of duty, causing great uproar when he was proven not guilty of crimes. He then steps into an interview with George Stephanopoulos, and describes his actions, which everyone wants to hear. But not once did he express any sympathy for his actions, feel bad that he killed someone's child, even if he is backed by the law. Where is the human heart? You see plenty of videos now on facebook or twitter where an officer is shoving someone's face in the dirt or talking forcefully to someone. And what does this do? It makes them look like animals, beasts, the brutes themselves. 

  This idea of a separate group has been perpetuated throughout all the stories we've read this year. In Camus' The Stranger, Meursault is convicted of a crime and sentenced to death at the dismay of many. In Light in August, officers are shown as racist and simple through their decision and are quick in their murder of Joe Christmas. 

  So how do we deal with this separation? Officers need to show some heart. Not just individuals, but as humans. None of these official suit-and-tie-typed-up-by-another apology (see Ray Rice), but just say sorry. It does't have to prove anyone guilty or weak or a liar or anything, just see them as a person. People want to be right and strong but act stubborn and thick skinned through trials. 

As Aristotle once said, "The only stable state is the one in which all men are equal before the law."

1930s or 2014?

I think it is incredibly fascinating, as well as massively off-putting, that as we read Faulker's Light In August, the world around us is experiencing the same racial binary that Faulkner emphasizes in a story written in the 1930s. The Ferguson story, as well as the death of Eric Garner in New York, have taken over media channels. News channels cover the story on repeat, and it has become the most prominent feed in some of my favorite shows, political satires like The Colbert Report and The Daily Show, in the last couple of months. Although I do acknowledge the fact that these stories deserve national attention, I feel as if the media has exacerbated the stories and brought upon an even greater level of frustration, especially in the case of Ferguson.

The riots that have destroyed the city of Ferguson, and have ignited protests all around the United States have been indicative of one belief-- that the racial binary continues to exist. The racial binary has expanded from just the typical WHITE/black binary to the LAW ENFORCEMENT/black individuals binary that has even received personalized attention in Soledad O'Brien's CNN documentary "Black and Blue", which covers the increasing sense of mistrust on behalf of black individuals towards law enforcement. Regardless of whether or not you believe the verdicts have been just or not, I think that most people can agree that it is disturbing that there exists a sensation that there continues to be such a widespread belief in the racial binary that Faulker illustrated in an early twentieth century novel.

Ultimately, the events of the past couple months have been unsettling because not only has the nation's racial dilemna been uprooted, but because there exists a strong connection between an early twentieth century novel and America today.

It Feels Like a Friday

Dogmatic is a really good word. When I first read it, my mind went to religion. Actually, I went right to the Dalai Lama. I thought of a "dogma", which, according to the dictionary, is "a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true". I thought- why would my mind go straight to religion? Does religion cause this mindless obedience? In some ways, yes. However, religion is also a source of great prosperity and ultimately our world would not be the same with out the powerful influence of religion.

In Light in August however, this mindless obedience is seen in the face of racism. Without question people persecute and assume that the black people are automatically at fault for any crime- even if there is not one shred of evidence. Even if you are just 1/4 black, your heritage incriminates you.

It is this unjustified following that infuriates me. If you have evidence- if you have PROOF that a person is the criminal- punish them as you would anyone else. If you have a reason to follow a religious dogma, do so. However, don't push these beliefs or racist ideologies on others. Each person is entitled to their own opinion, so let them have one.

Also, today is Thursday. But it feels like a Friday.

Hidden Racism

While I was reading my group's assigned passage today, one specific paragraph stuck with me, which made me think about racism, specifically hidden racism. On page 288, Faulkner writes "Among them the casual Yankees and the poor whites and even the southerners who had lived for a while in the north, who believed aloud that it was an anonymous negro crime committed not by a negro but by Negro..." (Faulkner 288). I find it interesting that Faulkner doesn't include the group of people who would be thought of as the racists, which are the true southerners. He lists people who are from the north and or wouldn't be view as racist, but they are. 

I then thought of my History of Chicago class where my teacher told us that, after his visit to Chicago, Martin Luther King Jr. said that Chicago was the racist city he has ever been to. This, at first surprised me because Chicago is in the north and people from the north tend to be "less racist." But this hidden racism in the north seems to be the worst form of racism after all. Through this passage Faulkner is showing how in his time period, everyone was racist to an extent.