The Thing + Kristeva

In the movie The Thing we are given the idea of an alien like creature with the ability to take the shape and form of anything it absorbs. It is able to hide itself by copying another creature's appearance and thus trick everyone. The way the creature is treated is as though it defiles a person and goes against everything that man has known. What is the signifigance of this defilement?

We see in the movie that it is fairly easy for someone to fool everyone into believing it is truly one of them and not the Thing, but we also see that it has its own flaws such as the blood test that is performed by McReady. Kristeva mentions that when the defilement issue is brought up men and women are seperated and men are viewed to be right and women to be passive, but possibly because the men truly feel threatened by woman's power and view that it is a power the must be supressed. The way the Thing is treated in the movie is that it is a power that is threatening man and must be supressed and destroyed.

The Thing is a force that man feels threatened by and is a threat to the way the world is run. It could potentially dominate the world and wipe out human kind. The Thing eventually defiles just about everyone until the facility is blown up and our main character McReady and Chase plan to let themselves die basically to prevent it from spreading anymore. Blair had discovered earlier in the movie as well that the Thing could spread over the entire world in just a matter of days. It potentially would defile and absorb every person in the world.

We also see what seems to be the development of a spaceship though and wonder if the Thing was truly just trying to survive and escape rather than seek to dominate everything. We can not get a true sense of the Thing of course because it is in our eyes just a monster a creature that in no way we could get along with or have peace with. But a variety of its actions in the film of course support the fact that its goal was to hide amongst everyone and eventually absorb/infect/defile everyone at the camp.

The Thing is truthfully my favorite horror film and I am glad we got to watch it. =) I hope this post did alright.

Ma Vie En Rose + Irigaray and Schiavi

Our main character of Ma Vie En Rose Ludovic is a transexual male who feels inside that he is a girl. The movie tries to express to the viewer the difficulties that a transexual individual has to be subject to in the society. Schiavi discusses the "coming-in" expression rather then the usual phrase of "coming-out" that is a phrase to express when usually a homosexual announces their sexuality. The "coming-in" phrase Schiavi uses of Nadeau is used in a way to describe how Ludo seems to have this pre-determined knowledge of his true identity. Ludo's identity as a transexual though is not accepted by the rest of the society that he lives in.

The family he lives with is accepting at first assuming that it is simply a "childhood phase" that he will eventually grow out of it. He is a spectacle for the adults when they first see his strange behavior and they too believe that it is just a regular child phase. The parents just let it go at first, but eventually start to seek the help of a therapist and other methods that others provide.

Later however Ludovic's actions coninue despite the parents attempts to "fix" him and thus other families begin to judge not only Ludovic, but the rest of his family as well. Ludovic's father loses his job and his mother begins smoking. His brothers however aren't effected by this much at all simply because they don't see the problem with their brother until the other children begin to take hostile action against him. There are earlier incidents of riducle of Ludovic that Schiavi address, but according to Schiavi: Ludovic uses silence as a method of survival. After all this pressure the role of the father and mother kind of switch, we see the father lose his aggression towards Ludovic but still harbor this sadness about him and the mother become aggressive and begins to shout and even strike Ludovic.

Ludovic and his transexualism does fit into Irigaray however because his attraction to all things femnine and seeks pleasure in things like dressing up, dancing, and Pam. He wants that which was not his own. But as we see society does not accept him and even his family doesn't until the very end when his mother has the vision of him running to Pam, but even then we can question if she still harbors this disbelief.

Far From Heaven + Fanon

In the film we watched Far From Heaven we see a 1950s kind of setting where there was still a lot of racism. Our main figures subject to racism are of course Raymond and his daughter, Sarah. Fanon's article is about him being a black man, but wishes that people would see him as a man and not judge him by the fact that he is black. Raymond is very similar in this because he goes to places that are both primarily white and primarily black. What is the signifigance of Raymond and his daughter in Far From Heaven?
In the 1950s racism was still very evident, but as we see with Kathy that there are some out there that began to treat them more nicely and equally. Raymond throughout the film is showing how he is a respectful, hardworking gentleman who is trying to look and act beyond race which makes him subject to not just insults from white people, but also fellow black people. The scene where he is in the restraunt with Kathy is where he recieves a lot of questions and stares from his fellow blacks and periodically through the movie we see whites staring or being racial such as the man yelling something similar to, "Hey boy! Take your hand off that lady!" Raymond's personality and actions set him apart from his own people which Fanon says that it is easy to identify himself through others of his own kind, but there is a moment of 'being for others'
Fanon continues to discuss that this 'being for others' is not so much the case because of civilization of the twentieth century. Fanon states that civilization imposes itself on the black man and how this forces inferiority upon him.
Raymond's daughter is also subject to this racial abuse and belief of inferiority. We see that she dresses nicely and appears to be a good student with polite manners, but when news of her father's association with Kathy is out she is also subject to the racial abuse. She has rocks thrown at her and is knocked out by them.
Raymond and Fanon share a connection in the fact that they both want to just be seen as men and not by their color, but both end up with this acceptance of this racists view because it is just too heavily forced upon them. Fanon feels the pressure from the stares he gets from white people and their judgements and Raymond does it for his daughter because he can't let her be hurt in this way and his relationship with Kathy has cost him basically everything; his job, his home, his safety. Both Fanon's article, Raymond, and his daughter are strong influences of the problems and oppression of racism.

Dancer In The Dark + Marx

Marx talks about how a person is alienated amongst others due to their position and responsibilities as a worker. Dancer in the Dark's characters are all part of the social class system; most part of the working class. What is the signifigance of this use of social class in Dancer in the Dark.

The main character, Selma, is a working class lady who only works to survive and pay for her sons operation. She begins to go blind and we see that she has a stronger desire to keep working. According to Marx a worker identifies basically between worker and physical subject. Selma's work is vital to her and her going blind is her physical subject eliminating her to work and the vice-versa of this of course is the fact that her loss of work has effected her vision of herself. She realized that with no longer being able to work that she had done all that she could essentially.

Bill, the police officer whose wealth was gained by inheritance, essentially falls apart when he realizes that he can no longer keep his material goods that he has identified himself with. He views his home and property as part of himself; he even in a way considers his wife to be an object because of his fear that when she realizes the money is gone she will leave him too so he needs money to keep her and all his belongings. The knowledge that all the objects he has connected himself to will disappear he feels as though he himself is going to disappear with them. The loss of his wife and house leads him to believe that he will have lost himself and what he has known. The loss of his social class, luxuries, and the inability to provide the needs of survival has caused him to lose himself and so he goes to extreme measures to train and maintain his position in the higher social class by stealing Selma's money.

The other characters are mainly representations of different positions in the working class and Selma is kind of their martyr or symbol of realization of how this capitalist society isn't working. This would be the discussion we have had in class about class consciousness and how their would eventually be a revolt against capitalism; the rise of the Proletariats. We could view Bill through Marx as a victim of capitalism as well because the loss of his money and wealth leading to destruction.

Perspolis, Epileptic, and White

In Persepolis and Epileptic there is a lot of focus put on culture. There is discussion of other cultures, their stories, and even the art. We know of course that there has to be a reason for these two graphic novels to incorporate this aspect of culture. What is the significance of the use of culture in both of these graphic novels?

Persepolis is a story about the author's life growing up in the Middle East during the times of revolution and the constant change in government. It is only natural that such a story would talk extensively of what the culture during that time period was, so that we may better understand the lifestyle and the troubles Marjane Satrapi had to go through. The diverse culture we see in Persepolis has a powerful impact because we see that the United States and Europe were a very big deal in the life of Marjane Satrapi; the posters and clothes she recieved from her parents we saw were a big risk to own during the time period she was growing up in.

Epileptic told the story of a family and how difficult it was growing up with the fact that they had many difficulties with their brother, Jean-Christophe, since he had constant seizures and would have to see the doctor and get much help because he had epilepsy. The art style in Epileptic is rather strange, but it also changes to the art styles and symbols of other cultures. The best example of this would be on pages 204 & 205. These pages show us many diverse cultures and we see these images throughout the story. David B. uses these images usually when he is telling a story he has heard or even to describe to us the monsters that his brother faces and how they fight them. We also have a moment where we find out that his brother attempts to draw a Nazi flag and in a way supports Hitler. We all see things like Anubis and other Egyptian figures throughout the story. David's use of these images is questionable, but he does use the history and cultures to enhance his story and even give us a different perspective and more emotional twist to enhance the story, because let's face it a story with such odd imaging and art is much more compelling and exciting then simply seeing text. The imaginative approach of Epileptic is definitely a strong suit for his story just as the realism of Persepolis is it's strength.

White would discuss the art of both these stories in the same way I believe. He would probably express greatly as to how this art style is a very influential matter on what the author is trying to express and in this case it is history. Both of the stories deal with a quite a bit of history and White tells us that a story based on History always has to follow a sequence of events and Persepolis and Epileptic are no exception. Both of the stories do follow a set timeline, but the use of their art and their story bring out the emotion of the time. Both stories explain a past history: Persepolis tells a story about the revolutionary times in Iraq and Iran; the difficulties of growing up in such harsh revolutionary and oppressive times, and Epileptic tells us the past of a two brothers and their sister growing up with their brother having a difficult mental disorder. The art talked about earlier is greatly used to give a graphic look and feel of the past they dealt with. The realism of Persepolis giving us a great sense of harshness and despite the harsh look that can be given we all see rebelious attitudes and how the art can change easily from emotion to emotion, scared and sad to angry or happy. There is also a lot of hidden art though such as page 91 the second to last panel. We see the two children and Marjane Satrapi going to bed and if you look at both their bedsheets we see the image of the American flag. It is a subtle cultural image, but it is indeed there. Epipleptic takes place from 1964 to 1996 and uses a lot of strange and imaginitive art to bring out a lot of the emotion during the time and the actual power of their history. The constant visits to doctors who would never really bring his brother improvement and how it effected him and his family.



Just as a side note:

I have to admit I found it slightly humorous during this story the moment where his art is being criticized on 293 - 294 and how his art is considered frightening and even when he is told to change it to make it less frightening he stubbornly uses the change to make it even more frightening and we see this connection from that scene to the next scene where he crosses paths with his brother on 295 - 296 because as the scene progresses his appearance changes and becomes more and more threatening.
(I just felt like pointing this out. =P )

Corrigan, Sleepwalk + McCloud, White

I mainly want to discuss an observation I made with Jimmy Corrigan and the various art that appeared like amusement park flyers and posters. I believe that that art can also appear as a form of propaganda. Propaganda is used to presuade a viewer to a certain view point and try to make the viewer believe it through imagery. Proganada is usually only referred to as a tool for the government, but in reality propaganda can take many forms. What is the signifigance of the art styles in both Corrigan and Sleepwalk ? And what is the importance, and difference, of Corrigan having propaganda like art and Sleepwalk using black and white more modern art?

We have learned that both Corrigan and Sleepwalk try to portray a message about human nature, but they both do it in very different ways. White tells us that author's always have a message to portray in their work and they use the narration style and art to portray that message and McCloud tells us that art and panelling can be used to symbolize meanings and messages to express an author's viewpoint. Sleepwalk is in black and white and seems very orderly, and this style gives us a depressive outlook on the stories that are all tied together in the way that they all end in solitude. Sleepwalk's point is very straightfoward and gives us a variety of stories to express that message. Jimmy on the other-hand is very random in it's ability to jump from various periods in time and appearance. We see a lot of scenes where the character barely moves, but then we may jump to an entirely different area. Throughout the book though we see various images that appear like flyers or posters; such as the image in white and blue where Jimmy appears to be attacking someone. We see that he is attacking someone, but the way the image is setup we still see it is some kind of enjoyable or light-hearted poster, it even reads that it is a poster of an 'improvisatory romance'. This can be very effective in a propaganda way; because it is able to show us Jimmy's darkside and bad outlook on humanity, but at the same time leave us calm and relaxed at what we are seeing.

There are more examples of this in other scenes, such as the scene where we see Jimmy attacking his father with a mug when he really isn't. We see this scene and we know he is attacking him in it, but we also know that it isn't really happening except in his mind and that they are actually having a conversation about the fruit basket he brought. This scene gives us inside of Jimmy's darkside and yet we take it lightheartedly because the fact that both characters appear calm, the coloring is still very light and not dark to express a scene of evil or corruption, and also that Jimmy gives us the impression that he is shy and scared almost always. Of course I don't believe the author is trying to make it appear like attacking someone is a good thing, but perhaps to express that these thoughts do occur in a person's mind from time to time or perhaps that due to Jimmy's past it would almost seem right for him to think this way. There is another image where Jimmy's face is black and red, but the background around his head is bright blue, red, and has white stars. I believe that this image expresses the joy around Jimmy and tries to make him some kind of shining image, but since Jimmy is very darkly potrayed with the clouds may show how his world is truly dark, sad, and even angry; maybe expressing how he feels as an outcast.

McCloud would definently discuss this as a creative way for the author to express their message. It may not be an entirely clear message, but it can be interpreted as we see it. We can gain more then one message from Corrigan's work and interpret things differently, but as I stated before we can tell Sleepwalk's message pretty clearly which means that Sleepwalk's author wanted to get straight to the point and give us that very realistic look on human nature.

These are of course my opinions on these two story art styles, but what other messages can be interpreted from both of these works?

Perhaps we can say that there is a very psychological aspect of both of the stories and how the actions of others can have negative effects on our minds and lives. Maybe they want to express something of society as a whole. We must always ask what other things can the author have wanted to express.

McCloud. V for Vendetta, and Sandman

In McCloud's Understanding Comics he explains to us on pages 178 - 184 that most artist must decide if they want their work to show a certain idea or point the author wants to make or does the author want to let the art take over and become his purpose and create ideas. We recently have read V for Vendetta and Sandman and so I question which of these two choices did each of the author's make?

I believe that both artists decided to write these tales for a specific meaning. We see in V for Vendetta that the message clearly stated is that people shouldn't let the government control everything and sometimes it takes anarchy to recreate the system of freedom and justice. Sandman seems to try and portrays a number of messages like how our dreams can basically control destiny and about our perspective of how the world works. Of course we must question how we get these messages out of the author's work and what is the signifigance of how they are presented?

McCloud writes in his book that an comic artist will use various iconic and non-iconic images to help portray their message. McCloud also explains to us that the transition of panels express a message of their own and they show that time has passed throughout a comic. We see in V for Vendetta that the panels are very orderly and the art very dark, so we can tell that the message from this is mainly about how society in the story is; the control of the government is very orderly, but there is no freedom in the panels and the darkness gives us a dark evil view of how the world in the graphic novel is run. We see the art in Sandman is rather bizarre and creative; the panels tend to be placed in random orders and sizes to help express certain parts of the story and we see that with these panels it is rather dream like with it's crazy approach. We get dragged into this creative dream style and it perhaps gives us an even closer feel to Dream as a character since he is the master of dreams and in a way he tends to bring order to the craziness we see. What about the art of the main character's though?

Well, McCloud discusses how people identify with a character on page 42. V in V for Vendetta does not truly have a face of his own except for his mask and in that since we can imagine that anyone can truly be V. This is proven even in the story because we see Eve take V's place; wearing his mask and costume and claiming to be him. Dream in Sandman is not as easy to identify with as V, but we can still identify with his bold nature and somewhat compassionate side for people, we view him as a hero figure much like V even if they do have their own agenda. V wants to create anarachy and change the world and we see that not everyone else wants this change to occur, but we believe V is doing the right thing for the people. It is possible however to say that V is doing this just for himself; even if he does not live after it he can find joy in the fact that his last act destroyed the thing his past tormentors had created. Dream of course we view as a hero because he challenges dangers and comes to show mercy on people like Rachel, John Constantine, and even Dee or Dr. Destiny; but he is also only associating with these people to recover his items that make him powerful, so we can not for surly say that he saved these people because it was important to him but perhaps it was just more convientent to.

So now the question is why or why not should we perceive these two as heros? I suppose that is only a matter of your own opinion.