Sam Courter
Sam Frace
Natalie Guyon
Cindy Himes
Rachel Hopkins
Isaac Lephart
Showing posts with label Natalie Guyon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Natalie Guyon. Show all posts
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Friday, November 15, 2013
You Hate Skyler White, because you are Skyler White.
I personally really liked our lecture today. The lecture hit a lot of wonderful points not only about geek culture, but pop culture in general. In my blog post I'll be talking about something that has almost been a universal hit in pop culture and that is the behemoth entitled, "Breaking Bad." Now if you haven't watched Breaking Bad then you've probably already had a mob of people yell at you for not treating yourself to this televised treasure. Breaking Bad follows Walter White, a chemistry teacher who has been diagnosed with lung cancer. He turns to making meth with a former student to secure his families finances after his death. Throughout the show you meet a wide array of despicable characters including psychotic drug lords, hit men, and even douche-bag cops. However, even in the midst these morally corrupted characters it seems that the most hated character is Walter's wife, Skyler.
Skyler White was indeed sometimes a hard character to deal with, but I never understood the complete and utter hatred towards her. Throughout the first season Skyler has no idea that Walt is transforming himself into a meth king pin. She was dealing with her own families struggle. Not only was her family having a hard time with money, but her husband had a cancer and her son was born with cerebral palsy. Oh, and she was pregnant. I'd say she had a pretty full plate. A lot of complaints attributed to Skyler is that she's just a "nagging bitch wife."
It's funny that people could defend Walt's actions in the first season by saying he's doing it for his family. Maybe Skyler was being a hard-ass wife because that was HER way of saving her family. Even after she finally catches Walt in his own lies, and finds out he cooks meth she is hated even more because of her distance towards Walt. When she helps him deal with his mass amount of wealth she was seen as someone who was bragging him down. Kind of funny that this type of attitude wasn't attributed to Jesse Pinkman, who was also just as naggy and the same ball of destruction that Skyler was seen as.
I think that the reason Skyler was so demonized was because she defied the typical complacent wife. Not to mention she was one of the most rational characters on the show. Generally speaking people hate the rational characters in media, because of how they are grounded in reality more then other characters. You hate Skyler White so much, because most if you were in that situation you would most likely be Skyler White.
If you can't tell by my post I really loved Skyler, and I think that she transcends "strong female character." Skyler is complicated, strong, a mother, emotional, and wrong a lot of the time. However, this doesn't make her a shit character. It makes her the best foil to Walt and one of the great antagonists of the show. I'm going to end my post with a quote from tumblr user MadLori, which I think rounds out our lecture about women in media and relates to Skyler White.
"Screw writing “strong” women. Write interesting women. Write well-rounded women. Write complicated women. Write a woman who kicks ass, write a woman who cowers in a corner. Write a woman who’s desperate for a husband. Write a woman who doesn’t need a man. Write women who cry, women who rant, women who are shy, women who don’t take no shit, women who need validation and women who don’t care what anybody thinks. THEY ARE ALL OKAY, and all those things could exist in THE SAME WOMAN. Women shouldn’t be valued because we are strong, or kick-ass, but because we are people. So don’t focus on writing characters who are strong. Write characters who are people."
Skyler White was indeed sometimes a hard character to deal with, but I never understood the complete and utter hatred towards her. Throughout the first season Skyler has no idea that Walt is transforming himself into a meth king pin. She was dealing with her own families struggle. Not only was her family having a hard time with money, but her husband had a cancer and her son was born with cerebral palsy. Oh, and she was pregnant. I'd say she had a pretty full plate. A lot of complaints attributed to Skyler is that she's just a "nagging bitch wife."
It's funny that people could defend Walt's actions in the first season by saying he's doing it for his family. Maybe Skyler was being a hard-ass wife because that was HER way of saving her family. Even after she finally catches Walt in his own lies, and finds out he cooks meth she is hated even more because of her distance towards Walt. When she helps him deal with his mass amount of wealth she was seen as someone who was bragging him down. Kind of funny that this type of attitude wasn't attributed to Jesse Pinkman, who was also just as naggy and the same ball of destruction that Skyler was seen as.
I think that the reason Skyler was so demonized was because she defied the typical complacent wife. Not to mention she was one of the most rational characters on the show. Generally speaking people hate the rational characters in media, because of how they are grounded in reality more then other characters. You hate Skyler White so much, because most if you were in that situation you would most likely be Skyler White.
If you can't tell by my post I really loved Skyler, and I think that she transcends "strong female character." Skyler is complicated, strong, a mother, emotional, and wrong a lot of the time. However, this doesn't make her a shit character. It makes her the best foil to Walt and one of the great antagonists of the show. I'm going to end my post with a quote from tumblr user MadLori, which I think rounds out our lecture about women in media and relates to Skyler White.
"Screw writing “strong” women. Write interesting women. Write well-rounded women. Write complicated women. Write a woman who kicks ass, write a woman who cowers in a corner. Write a woman who’s desperate for a husband. Write a woman who doesn’t need a man. Write women who cry, women who rant, women who are shy, women who don’t take no shit, women who need validation and women who don’t care what anybody thinks. THEY ARE ALL OKAY, and all those things could exist in THE SAME WOMAN. Women shouldn’t be valued because we are strong, or kick-ass, but because we are people. So don’t focus on writing characters who are strong. Write characters who are people."
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
We're here, we're a queer, and we're plot devices!
When were talking about Ellen and being gay on television last week I couldn't help but think about how being gay in the media hasn't changed as much as we think. Although, visibility of the LGBT community has become more assessable as a whole there is still a lot more progress to be made. A lot of this has to do with being acceptably gay, or who can be represented in the main stream media.
As we talked about in class there is a "code" to being gay in the media. You have to be gay, but not too gay. If the character, or a public figure who has come out, and you have significant other affection is still seen as uncomfortable, or a spectacle. Not only can someone be "too gay," but their sexual is often used as a plot device, which honestly never happens to heterosexuals.
I think the last cog in the gay code machine is who gets exposure in the LGBT community. There's no way to sugarcoat the fact that most queer characters are generally white males. There are a few gay PoC represented on television, like Lafayette Reynolds in True Blood. However, it's a fact that the number of white gay male characters is still higher. Lesbian characters are seen in media and there are a more WoC, but these characters are often more sexualized. Transgender and transsexual characters are also visible, but unfortunately the seemingly long list of trans characters on wikipedia can be misleading seeing as a lot of the examples are from shows like CSI and Law and Order. I think the worst examples are seen in comedy shows where the characters are used for comedic purposes. Bisexual characters often appear and either fall into the traps set up by their genders, or used as shock value.
Even though there is more progress to be made I am still thankful for the growing exposure of LGBT characters in media. I think that there will be progress to be made regardless of the time. However, the fact that there has been a small change is still great news and I hope that this progress continues!
As we talked about in class there is a "code" to being gay in the media. You have to be gay, but not too gay. If the character, or a public figure who has come out, and you have significant other affection is still seen as uncomfortable, or a spectacle. Not only can someone be "too gay," but their sexual is often used as a plot device, which honestly never happens to heterosexuals.
I think the last cog in the gay code machine is who gets exposure in the LGBT community. There's no way to sugarcoat the fact that most queer characters are generally white males. There are a few gay PoC represented on television, like Lafayette Reynolds in True Blood. However, it's a fact that the number of white gay male characters is still higher. Lesbian characters are seen in media and there are a more WoC, but these characters are often more sexualized. Transgender and transsexual characters are also visible, but unfortunately the seemingly long list of trans characters on wikipedia can be misleading seeing as a lot of the examples are from shows like CSI and Law and Order. I think the worst examples are seen in comedy shows where the characters are used for comedic purposes. Bisexual characters often appear and either fall into the traps set up by their genders, or used as shock value.
Even though there is more progress to be made I am still thankful for the growing exposure of LGBT characters in media. I think that there will be progress to be made regardless of the time. However, the fact that there has been a small change is still great news and I hope that this progress continues!
Friday, November 8, 2013
Are weddings really that interesting?
Back when I was a kid when I heard the word marriage I always thought of the ending of a Disney movie (surprise.) The beautiful princess and prince get their happily ever after and ride off into the sunset in wedded bliss never to see any marital problems ever. I've had my time to talk about Disney and how damaging their media can be, however I'm actually going to praise Disney for one second here. Disney presents marriage as this beautiful thing two people get to enjoy after overcome their personal struggles. I mean sometimes it may be an evil queen, or dragon, but to be fair at the end it's still seen a reward that you work hard for. While I think that instilling the idea of marriage in little girls is kind of creepy, I do think that giving them an overall positive and innocent view of marriage and love can be a great thing. Especially when you compare it to how reality shows portray marriage.
Honestly, it's can of crazy how many wedding reality shows that are on air, or have been on T.V. at some point. I googled, "how many wedding reality shows are on T.V.?" thinking that there may be 10, or 12 in total. There have been around 33 reality shows based on, or around weddings. That is insane. I would like to point out that unlike these weddings are idealized almost as much as Disney wedding, but in a different way. These shows are all out that blow out big fat wedding. The fact that the average cost of a wedding is on the rise in this country can be directly blamed on these shows. The give this false sense of what is a "normal" wedding.
Most, or all of these shows have an insane price tag that viewers don't realize. The average cost of a wedding in the United States is about 24,000 dollars and raising. And can you really be surprised at the raising cost when most of the weddings featured on television cost probably around 60,000 dollars? While Disney has it's problems with raising children's idea o what love and marriage is these reality shows raise expectations as to how lavish a wedding can be. I'm not surprised that more marriages end in divorce now. Before the couple even tie the know they're already under a huge financial burden.
Reality shows are not true to reality, and having these shows that are based on marriage and even dating is so damaging to couples of all genders and orientations. While they may all seem fun and happy in the moment they do give off a strong message of bad finances and terrible behaviors for brides and grooms. I thought the whole point of a wedding was a bonding of love not to over spend.
Honestly, it's can of crazy how many wedding reality shows that are on air, or have been on T.V. at some point. I googled, "how many wedding reality shows are on T.V.?" thinking that there may be 10, or 12 in total. There have been around 33 reality shows based on, or around weddings. That is insane. I would like to point out that unlike these weddings are idealized almost as much as Disney wedding, but in a different way. These shows are all out that blow out big fat wedding. The fact that the average cost of a wedding is on the rise in this country can be directly blamed on these shows. The give this false sense of what is a "normal" wedding.
Most, or all of these shows have an insane price tag that viewers don't realize. The average cost of a wedding in the United States is about 24,000 dollars and raising. And can you really be surprised at the raising cost when most of the weddings featured on television cost probably around 60,000 dollars? While Disney has it's problems with raising children's idea o what love and marriage is these reality shows raise expectations as to how lavish a wedding can be. I'm not surprised that more marriages end in divorce now. Before the couple even tie the know they're already under a huge financial burden.
Reality shows are not true to reality, and having these shows that are based on marriage and even dating is so damaging to couples of all genders and orientations. While they may all seem fun and happy in the moment they do give off a strong message of bad finances and terrible behaviors for brides and grooms. I thought the whole point of a wedding was a bonding of love not to over spend.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Girl Power isn't just for girls anymore.
As millennial I feel like the need for nostalgia is almost overwhelming. Cartoons and other children's programming was such a huge part of my childhood, as I'm sure it was for everyone else in the class. Seeing as I am also a girl I typically leaned towards these girl power programs (although I watched a lot of "boys" programs too.) While I was reading the article about Nick and empowered girls in children's pop culture my mind couldn't help but wander to my favorite programs as a kid. Shows in the 1980s like G.I. JOE and My Little Pony ushered in a lot of new cartoon content, but it's sole purpose was the sell toys. The 90s still had that profit motive, but the children's program became focused on making more diverse and thoughtful programming. Shows like Batman: The Animated Series and The Power Puff Girls won the hearts of not only girls and boys, but a lot of the critics too.
Each children's network not only had shows that fit into the "Girl power" category, but programs that were geared towards boys had at least one, or multiple well rounded female characters. I would argue that the girl power trend has seeped into children's programming across the board. I'm going to go back the the 80s yet again, because the transformation of children's programming has been so great since that time. Female characters in the 1980s were generally pretty bland, while there were a few exceptions; for the most part the female characters in both girls and boys programming were pretty troped out and recyclable. I would argue that male characters were treated the same way in some regards, because the point of the shows were to sell the toys.
Skip forward to the 90s, and even to shows that have aired in recent years, casts of empowered female characters have grown. I don't think this growth of active and diverse female characters for both girls and boys to relate to is only thanks to Girl Power. However, I do think that it has benefited and evolved thanks to the interest in girl power. These female and male characters have strong bonds of friendship, strength, intellect, and leadership. These examples of strong values help both genders relate to one another. Instead of highlighting the differences between male and female characters this phenomenon has strengthened the bridge between them.
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Pretty Pretty Princess
Our lecture on Princess Culture I think hit very close to home for a lot of people in class today. Everything fed to us in popular culture has been spoon fed to young girls as a product. The term "Disney Princess" used to just reference a handful of characters that Disney owns. However, once Andy Mooney saw the want for more Disney princess products the Disney Princess line was started and brought some highest revenue that Disney had ever seen.
Speaking for myself this makes me kind of angry. When I was younger I don't remember too much princess merchandise. It wasn't until after I left my "princess phase" that this line was created. I think the biggest reason as to why this line makes me angry is that it waters down these characters and molds them into faceless characters that represents profit. Quite a few of these princesses have been put into a negative light for being static characters that don't control their stories and are glorified set pieces. The more modern princess have become more and more active than the older princesses. However, even with Disney's introduction of more and more active princesses (Ariel, Belle, Meridia etc.) they still marginalize them by molding them into these money making machines, and denying them of their characteristics.
As we talked about in class today this separation of these characters can be detrimental to how young girls view the princesses. Instead of seeing well rounded characters they view a shiny and spoiled imposture. Because of this they might not absorb the great attributes of the princess they will just take the materialist view.
Speaking for myself this makes me kind of angry. When I was younger I don't remember too much princess merchandise. It wasn't until after I left my "princess phase" that this line was created. I think the biggest reason as to why this line makes me angry is that it waters down these characters and molds them into faceless characters that represents profit. Quite a few of these princesses have been put into a negative light for being static characters that don't control their stories and are glorified set pieces. The more modern princess have become more and more active than the older princesses. However, even with Disney's introduction of more and more active princesses (Ariel, Belle, Meridia etc.) they still marginalize them by molding them into these money making machines, and denying them of their characteristics.
As we talked about in class today this separation of these characters can be detrimental to how young girls view the princesses. Instead of seeing well rounded characters they view a shiny and spoiled imposture. Because of this they might not absorb the great attributes of the princess they will just take the materialist view.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)