Week of Nov. 17-21

This week was entitled, "Race and Hip Hop and Black Cinema," drawing sharp distinctions with who was in and out of the Hip Hop/Black Gang culture of the late 1980s and 1990s. Even today, these gangs still persist and the culture that surrounds them only serves to help keep up the support system of the gangs. Off the top of my head, there have been two great rappers who have died due to the gang culture that surrounds and inhabits Hip Hop, Notorious B.I.G. and Tupac. Both were taken before their time and I beleive that if they knew what would happen in advance of their deaths, they would have taken more steps to stop the gang-like war between the hip-hip coasts of West and East.

We saw clips from many films that glamorized the gang culture (basically, real depictions), and we saw how it is not only the black male who attaches himself to the cult of power that a gang offers but any male who has been born into underpriveleged conditions and doesn't want to have to work their way up through the society ladder. The gang culture offered an "out" in which those participants in it didn't have to work the daily grind job, or pretend as if they wanted to got to college. They could be in a gang, mafia or mob and just say that is what they wanted to do, no furhter aspirations, just be a gang man for the rest of their lives and that was an okay answer for society because it meant job security and good pay, as long as you stayed alive.

Today, the gang culture has become somewhat less mainstream with rappers emphasizing street roots, but not the gang culture that might have been prevalent in the area in which they grew up. Rappers today are more likely to rap about their money and women than the trials and tribulations they faced in order to get to where they are today. The culture is still perpetuated in their music, just in a less overt manner. 

Week of Nov. 10-14

For one of the last (real) weeks of class, and one in which the one-month countdown until the end of the semester began, the topic up for discussion and analyzation was "Issues of Contemporary Racism in American Society." And not only were we seeing just anaylsis of certain racially tense situations and the response to that certain situation, but we were actually witnessing (via different forms of media) the overt racism that still pervades American Society and threatens to rip our country apart based on a skin color. 

Most striking among the course materials asigned for this particular week was the selection of Naomi Klein's theory about the "Shock Doctrine," and how the government uses natural disasters and times of great distress to pass through unpopular bills while the public is still recovering from the shock of the event, so they cannot be bothered by questioning what might really be happening to them and their country due to their utter zombiefied nature. I do believe that the governement does these types of things, just like after 9/11. After an absolutely shocking and terrifying act of terrorism was exacted on differerent locations along the Eastern seaboard (most notably in Manhattan), the government pushed through the Patriot Act, which inlcuded many provisions which have now been "sun-setted", or taken out as per guidelines in the official rules of the Act. Many parts of the Act have been called unconstitutional, but any law-maker to have voted against this in the weeks following September 11, 2001, would have have been considered unpatriotic at best, and an enemy of the state in some not-so-far-off reality that we now inhabit. Most of their constituents just wanted action from the government, and this Act provided that while also providing America with a major blow to her Bill of Rights. It may not have seemed as if the Bush (Jr.) Administration forced through a lot of bills and legislation, but they never had to because Republicans controlled every branch of the government. With that kind of power, who need a shock doctrine, it's shocking all year long.

Week of Nov. 3-7

This post will probably mainly talk about movies as the movies assigned for this week are three of my favorite movies (I have a large number of favorite movies). I think of film as a complex medium through which society can discuss hot-button issues that are sometimes considered taboo.

In George Stevens' sprawling epic Giant (1956), the characters move through life on a Texas ranch, on which oil is discovered by James Dean's brooding ranch hand character. The film goes through his obsession with oil and it basically shows how his greed brought him down, despite his good intentions. Also, one of the more interesting things about this film is the subplot which involves one of Rock Hudson and Elizabeth Taylor's characters' children and his spouse, a Mexican-American. It is punctuted by the type of closed doors to minorities that were so prevalent before the Civil Rights era, but ends with Hudson's character getting into a fistfight in a diner in defense of his daughter-in-law. 

There is also the brilliant film starring Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood (2007). Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson, what is so funny about having this film on the same day as the previously mentioned film is the majority of both films were shot in the same small West Texas town, Marfa. This story centers more on Daniel Day-Lewis' character's greed and his emergence as the dominant oil man, through whatever means necessary. It also depicts a broad range of time difference and still retains it's focus as a film which is about Day-Lewis' character, not so much everything that is happening around him. 

Dean and Day-Lewis' character's don't differ much in that both are greedy and seem to only need their money. Day-Lewis' character end up alone due to his inability to accept that other can have a stake in the way things occur or what happens around them. Dean's character ends up lonely and alone due to the fact that he thought money could buy him love and affection, when in reality it only bought him less of that very thing. 

Week of Oct. 28-31

This week was entitled, "Race and Global Violence." Notably, we spoke about child soldiers in African underpriveleged countries on Wednesday and Dr. Tchouaffe spoke on a paper of his own writing on Frday (Halloween), which I regrettably missed due to my inability to send in for an absentee voter ballot which caused me to have to leave early in order to be able to submit my vote for CHANGE. Reading for this week included the aforementioned Olivier Tchouaffe paper on child soldiers, "Necropolitics" by Achille Mbembe and a screening of the film Blood Diamond (2006), which is a wonderful film that looks at the issue of child soldiers through the lens of a diamond hunter in the war-torn country of Sierra Leone. 

In the film, starring Leonardo DiCaprio as the aforementioned diamond hunter, he accompanies a man who is looking to find his son in the rebel bands of fighters so that he can take him home with him and reunite his family. In the end, the finding of his son uncovers so much more about the reason for the conflict than he ever intended to do and he helps to bring down the blood diamond trade, thus helping to cut funding to groups opposing peaceful governing forces in the countires where the diamond trade is conducted. The child soldiers are only utilized because they are easy to hypnotize into beleiving something and will rally behind a leader, who seems parent-like, when they are lost and cannot find their own. 

We watched a clip of a man speaking about his book on child soldiers and he himself, managed to find a way to get away from the rebel bands and how long it took to rehabilitate him back into nomal civilian life once he was freed. he spoke of the horrors of having to be fed many different types of drugs and the experience that this provided for himself and his fellow child soldiers. Some of the drugs he was given even contained dangerous mixtures of crack cocaine and gunpowder, which have probably damaged him for life. It is a strange situation which none of his, haveing grown up in this country, can even begin to comprehend the magnitude of.

Week of Oct. 20-24

The title for this week was "Race and Sport." We didn't meet as a class on Monday so that we could turn in our midterms, but we resumed the regular schedule on Wednesday. Assigned readings for this week were, "Young, Black, Rich and Famous," by Todd Boyd, an examination of the Duke Lacrosse team rape case through several articles as well as in-class video clips, and a watching of the movie, Hoop Dreams (1995). This week also inlcuded rousing and enthused class discussions on the subject of the Duke Lacrosse team and on rape cases involving Kobe Bryant and Mike Tyson. I want this blog to focus mainly on the discussion aspects as they actively engage the readings at the basest of levels and in my opinion, the class was more involved and particapatory in these discussions than in any one previously. 

Class discussion on the day of the presention given about the Duke Lacrosse rape case centered mainly on the differing stories and what possible reasons for this could be. Many people rather than calling it a case involving race, said that it was a case involving class. Upper class white male athletes who ordered a stripper to their house, only to have her report an incident of rape two weeks later. The argument seems compelling and it seems logical that a woman in her position might see an opportunity to get some quick cash, because if she was really raped why did she wait so long to come forward? But in a case that involves two different classes, it is necessary to examine race as an added facet to the multi-faceted case, especially when the case in question occured in the South, as this one did. The young men were white and the stripper was black, not necessarily a product of "the possessive investment in Whiteness," in this country, but it definitely seems to fall under that category.

In the cases of Kobe Bryant and Mike Tyson, we see two black athletes who were thrust into the sports spotlight. Both were involved in rape cases and in both cases, the woman came forward with accusations. But the difference lies in where the two men grew up. Kobe grew up as a middle class kid in a suburb while Mike was a product of the "Hood" or the streets of a large urban area. This changes how the media, and subsequently America, reacted towards the news of their cases. In Mike's case, he didn't apologize to the woman or to the jury for what he had done (or to his family members), he just maintained his innocence. He went to jail for three years. Kobe immediately issued a press release denying the claims of the woman and decrying her accusations as it brought unwanted attention onto his family. He even cried during susequent press conferences. Hood athletes never cry, suburb athletes do. But, I guess they shoul learn to start crying because Kobe got off scot-free, received a contract extension form the Lakers, America forgot about it and he is now featured in the new Guitar hero advertisement along with Alex Rodiguez, Tony Hawk, and Michael Phelps. Go figure?

Week of Oct. 13-17

This week was a a continuation of the race and genocide topic from the previous week on the days of Fall Break in which we were not in class and then on Wednesday and Friday, we moved into Jews and the Movies and Media Stereotypes of Jews. This was the week I chose for my in-class leadership project, and I chose to focus on the film Jews, Movies and the American Dream (1998), and the reading by Martha Woodbury titled, "Media Stereotypes of Jews: From JAPs to MDs." This week jumped out at me as a good selection because it is something that I am very interested in to begin with and the content of this class only serves to enhance my interest and broaden the scope with which I am able to examine the issued at hand.

The film is a great biography feature of the Jewish Hollywood studio moguls. It shows how they started out in Eastern Europe and then all had to fight the establishment on the East Coast, eventually moving out west to California to make movies away from Edison's Producers' Trust. What is know thought of as the "American dream" was invented by the studios of the Hollywood moguls and it is a little bit ironic, as was mentioned in the film, that these Jewish men who moved West to escape the hierarchy of the East would be responsible for generations of aspirations and hopes and dreams. I will quote the movie indirectly, as it said something to the effect of, "They weren't allowed into the real America, so they created their own 'shadow' America. Then, ironically, this 'shadow' America became what Americans associate their nation identity with." 

In the reading, Woodbury examines media stereotypes of Jews and where they draw their historical background from. She talks about the following stereoptypes: the greedy Jew, the stubborn Jew, the Jewish woman (including the Jewish American Princess), the Jewish mother and Jewish men. She seeks to provide a basis for understanding the stereotypes in film and other types of media so that when we see them, we may be able to identify them and not digest them passively. The dangers of not talking or studying about media stereotyping of Jews far outweighs the dangers of talking about it, which include further perpetuating the sterotypes in some type of media, be it for study or examination, it is still helping to create a greater awareness which always means that some people might latch onto the negative aspects of the argument rather than the positive ones. 

Week of Oct. 6-10

The only item listed on this week's agenda was under Friday's title, "Race and Genocide." The reading assigned for Friday was a selection from a book called, "The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide," by Jay Lifton. We were assigned chapters 7 and 8 to read and further examine so that we could discuss not only the debilitating effects genocide has on a group of people within whom it is exercised, but also the effect it can have upon on those who perform, in one way or another, in the process.

In the reading, Lifton says that, "Auschwitz can be understood only in relation to its three historical identities: as a Nazi concentration camp...as a work camp...and as an anhiliation camp..." (Lifton 312/425). It is essential to understand how it transformed into something completely different from the beginning of its creation (also, as the war continued) to understand how Nazis underneath the highest posts of command were able to stomach the orders for its next stages of eveolution. It was a gradual movement towards genocide, not an all-of-a-sudden rush to kill all the Jews in sight. The Nazi party not only couldn't have accomplished this, but more than likely as their goals for ultimate extermination failed, so would they have.

He also examines the processes of killing undertaken by Nazis in the in concentration camps. He also discusses how the doctors in the camps would actively choose the processes and sometimes even get into heated debates about why a certain process should be utilized. Someow, the topic of whether or not, as medical professionals, they should even be participating in should horrors never came up in the discussions. Doctors were also left to deal with the enormous amounts of corpses. They had to find a solution to the fact that the crematoria at Auschwitz wasn't near big enough to burn all of the bodies that were being systematically killed every day.