Blade Runner

The argument I feel like director Ridley Scott was trying to make with Blade Runner was that when the body and technology are mixed together, the result is a disastrous one. Man should keep its relationship with technology a distant one, making sure to keep the lines between robot and a living being, a very distinct one.

Alright, let me know if there was something else you wanted to know.

Prompt #12

I think Cronenberg uses violence in Videodrome because of how it affects the audience. I think Cronenberg was aiming for the reaction that Julia said she had. By causing such emotions, the audience will definitely remember what they saw. In Videodrome, the emotional reaction caused by the violence is what causes the hallucinations. I think this goes right along with my argument for my final project. The relationship with the body and the technology, showing a violent scene, affects the body enough to get some kind of response, usually a negative one (such a Julia's repulsion or Max's hallucinations). This relationship is not a beneficial one and any time it occurs, there are negative consequences. This relationship seems to be a constant one as seen in Videodrome, Neuromancer and Blade Runner.

Prompt #11 - Blade Runner

"Blade Runner" makes an interesting argument about the relationship the body and technology have with one another. This movie surrounds a group of "Replicants," which are basically robots made to be very, very human-like. These Replicants were given traits that you wouldn't usually think a robot would have, such as a five o'clock shadow, the ability to sweat or the fact that they may not even know whether they are human or Replicant. This movie has your classic elements from any futuristic sci-fi film, right down to the flying cars.

The basic argument I feel this movie is making with the relationship between the body and technology is that they are two very different things, and people should remember this, no matter how human-like the technology gets. In the movie, the Replicants are basically murderers who are on the run. I won't give away too much of the story in case anybody wants to watch it in the future.

From a cinematic standpoint, director Ridley Scott uses all the traditional tools, such as the rule of thirds and character points of view. These tools help the viewer get a more personal feel for the movie.

Post #10

In "Neuromancer," Case is the only live hacker, aka cowboy, that we encounter. Aside from the Rastafarians, he is the only character who has no physical body modifications. I see this as ironic because he is the only one who actually goes in to cyberspace, which requires psychological modifications. Case isn't interested in physical body modifications because cowboys, Case included, have a stern disregard for the body. Throughout the book, Case usually refers to the body as simply, "the meat." This shows that Case prefers to be in cyberspace and leave his body behind.

There is really only one time throughout the book that we actually get a good look at how Case really looks like. This is towards the end when he jacks into the Matrix and flips his simstem switch to see Molly looking at him. He is described as "wasted", unshaven, and sweaty. This obviously is an unflattering description, but he doesn't seem to care. He doesn't care about his looks because as I previously mentioned, Case has no attachment to his physical being.

Based on our experience with Case and how he repeatedly refers to the body as "the meat" I would imagine that other hackers share his opinion about the body. To them, their mind and central nervous system are the only things that are important because that is what allows them to jack into the Matrix.

Prompt #7

In this class, we have been looking at all kinds of body modifications. When thinking about our past discussions about the different types, especially about tattoos, it seems that one thing we have touched on slightly is how much modification is too much. When talking about "normative" body modifications and when they become radical I think of when someone has had too much of it done. For example, body builders, whether male or female, look very odd. In my opinion it is very unnecessary for someone to look like that. In that case, their type of modification is a taboo, at least to me.

This idea stretches to all modifications. If someone has too many tattoos (which are now becoming normalized), too many piercings, too much plastic surgery, or has dieted too much and is now dangerously thin, then they are viewed as odd and their style to be taboo and out of the norm. Although these types of modifications, in a moderate extent, are usually viewed as normative and not frowned upon, in an extreme extent, they can cause dirty looks from people in public because of their "unnatural" appearance. This is when "normative" modifications become considered different just like non-normative modifications.

One thing I think is that different modifications may seem normal or odd to someone, it just depends on the person and their experiences. A body builder, or someone who works in the bodybuilding business, won't find the look of other bodybuilders odd, they will seem normal because they have experience in that field. Same thing goes with dieters, people with tattoos and people who are pierced.

Prompt #6

Well, this is my first college writing class. I passed the AP English test in my junior year of high school, so I didn't have to take the first rhetoric course. Before this class, I've never had to write more than a two-page paper. This is why I always feared the day when I would have to write my first multiple page paper for college. I didn't feel prepared, and based on my grade on paper 1.1, I apparently have some hard work ahead of me. In high school, I tried to stay away from the cliched five paragraph essay and just tried to make my writing flow as best as I could. When I think of any kind of academic writing, I think of doing the best I can to follow the prompt and use words that help me sound like I know what I'm talking about, whether I really do or not. When doing this kind of writing, I try to use an interesting opening sentence and a clever, well-worded conclusion. I do this because I like to have a strong beginning and a strong ending to try and make up for any problems that may occur in the body of the paper.

As usual, I like to talk about tattoos. This is mostly because I really want to get one, but I want it to really mean something so it's taking me a while to pick something. I think tattoos are the easiest, and most common (plus one of the most permanent) ways to really say something. Most of the time, there is a specific meaning or story to a tattoo. An example of this can be an experience that changed your life, so you get a picture to signify this, as if to say to the world "This happened and I got through it and look at me now." Another example could be getting a name or picture of a family member that passed away. This is obviously saying that you love(d) this person and you miss them. Although there is always room for interpretation by spectators when it comes to tattoos, there's always a meaning and possibly a message behind the tattoo.

Two semesters ago I took a communications class and one thing that really stuck out to me was that no matter what you say or how you say it, the audience may interpret the message in any way, mostly based on their experiences. I think this goes along with limitations in authorship and writing. Someone can make a bold statement or get a creative tattoo, but it is up to the audience reading or viewing to decipher the message behind it all. As we have all experienced, it's not uncommon for the audience to misinterpret the meaning behind the message. It doesn't really matter what I was trying to say with this statement or tattoo if the true message isn't received by the audience. For this reason, I don't think that authorship and control are equal terms. All one can really do is get their message out as effectively as they can and hope that the meaning is understood.

Prompt #5

Both of these sources look at how body modification is very alive in today's world. The first I want to touch on is the Marketplace story about how tattoos are becoming more and more acceptable in today's work force. This story approaches the body art in the context of the business world and how they affect one another. Every day, young adults are entering the work force with tattoos and every day, businesses are having to deal with these potential employers having tattoos. Recently, more businesses have begun to accept tattoos on their employees. This is radically different than 30 years ago. Times change quickly and businesses have to adapt to these changes. Although there are still some companies who do not hire people with tattoos, or at least visible ones, most companies have learned to accept these people and their individuality and potential for success.

The National Geographic photo gallery consists of multiple photos on various forms of modifications from scarification to tattoos to stretching of the ears and lip. These photographs and the captions that are with them are just basically to inform about different types of modifications done around the world by different peoples. These photos are meant to show the beauty of being different and how natural and spiritual it can be.

When looking at both of these examples of body modification, I think tattoos and certain modifications have become widely accepted throughout society to not be exotic, but to be a form of individuality. Although these practices originated from exotic people and places, Western society has adopted them as their own. I don't think certain practices will ever be changed in those exotic places, but I think that Western society will continue to adapt any new practices that come along.

Prompt #4

The print advertisement that really stuck with me was the one with the young girl that has the quote, "Wishes she were blonde." I think the message Dove is trying to convey with this ad is that today’s beauty industry and it's distorted view of what beauty is supposed to be is having a deep impact on young girls. Dove is saying that the beauty industry is making young girls have a set stereotypical image what beauty is supposed to be, with one of the requirements is to be blonde. In doing this, Dove is also trying to tell the consumer that there is no set of requirements for beauty; that being blonde doesn’t constitute beauty.

The video that really stuck with me was the one entitled “Amy.” Once again, Dove is going after the angle that the beauty industry really has a huge impact on young girls and their self esteem. According to Dove, this can make the girls feel ugly if they don’t look like the women on tv they see every day.

My opinion of this campaign is that Dove has the right idea, but I don’t think it’s for the right reasons. I feel like this is just another ploy to sell products and make money. I agree with the message, but I don’t agree with the reason behind it.

Short Writing #2: Arikara Girl

Curtis - Arikara Girl
Originally uploaded by jilliansayre

This Edward Curtis photograph is entitled “Arikara Girl”. It is a very simple photograph depicting only a lone girl in a posed setting. My first thoughts when looking at this picture was that this girl was very weary and unhappy. In further examination of the image, I noticed that this seemingly simple and plain figure was saying much more than one could see from first glance.

The first thing I noticed in this picture was her face and facial expression. Based on how her eyes are lowered and the frown she seems to have, I got the feeling like she was very sad and almost tired at the same time, as if she had seen or experienced some hardships in the recent past. Her hair is one thing that helps solidify this assumption. It is messy and appears to be unclean. Her glance is off to the right side of the portrait and is seemly at nothing, almost as if she is daydreaming or reminiscing of her past. The argument I feel is being made here is that the Native American people are one who have experienced much oppression.

The next thing that caught my eyes in this photograph was this Native American girl’s top. Her top seems to be of traditional Native American garb. It is very detailed with multiple colors and designs. Although she seems to be dressed in a traditional fashion, the thing that throws me off her the type of overcoat she is also wearing, covering up part of her top. The overcoat is very plain and simple, which is not what I usually picture Native American attire to be, especially when covering the torso. This gave me the impression that she may have possibly gotten this plain black overcoat from some European. As noted in our travel writings that we recently read, the Native American women constantly traded with the Europeans. This same fact could possibly be the very reason why this girl has such a weary look on her face.

Another theme that was conveyed to us as we read the travel writings was lack of clothing worn by the Native American people. This was seen by the Europeans as very unusual. The only skin that this girl is showing in this image is her neck and face. There is no exposure of skin anywhere else. This may be a change in custom brought on by interactions with Europeans, similar to my thought that she traded for her overcoat with a European.

In my opinion, I feel like Curtis was trying to convey the oppression of Native Americans by the European travelers. At first glance, I felt this picture didn’t say much, but upon further examination, I felt like based on the subtle details of the image, one could get a sense for what the artist an model were trying to convey.

Prompt #3

When looking at the two paintings, the first thing I noticed was that the two are practically mirror images of each other, with minor differences of course.

The first painting I want to talk about is Benjamin West's original piece. This painting seems to be meant as an exact replica to the event. West put much detail into every aspect of this piece, even down to the boats in the water and the house being built in the background. Attention to such detail suggests to me that West felt that is moment in time was a very important and meaningful time and he wanted everyone who saw this painting to feel like they were standing right there. West depicts two bodies in his painting: the Native American and the Europeans. The Europeans, including William Penn, are dressed very nobly, presenting ornamentation from canes to hats. The Native Americans on the other hand, as we have repeatedly seen, are scantily clad. This difference, from our recent discussions in class, seems to present the contrast between barbarity and nobility, but for some reason in this painting, I don't feel that was the emotion West was going for. I get the sense that there is an obvious difference, and all that West was trying to show was the fact that there was a difference and that's it. The Europeans and Native Americans both have members standing and kneeling and you can tell that those standing seem to be at the same height as one another; there is no dominance due to one being higher than another.

Now when I look at Edward Hicks' painting of the exact same interaction occurring between Penn's Europeans and the Native Americans, the first thing I notice, again, is the amount of detail put into the piece. Now I'm not sure if all of Hick's paintings look this way, but I got the feeling that this obviously momentous event was portrayed was cartoon-ish. Hicks' took West's painting and basically flipped it. This suggests to me that his opinion about Penn's Treaty is the opposite of how West felt. The title of Hick's painting is "Penn's Treaty with the Indians" almost to suggest the treaty is Penn's, not anyone else's. Something that really stuck out to me in this painting was the fact that Hicks' portrayed the event on a ledge. At the bottom of the painting, you can clearly see a ledge. Even though Hicks' almost mirrors West's painting, there is no ledge in West's piece. What Hicks' is trying to say with this ledge though, I'm not really sure.

Prompt #2

After reading the packet, I think I have a pretty good idea of what the "New World Body" Looks like. When I think about the "New World Body" I picture a figure that is strong and proud. He stands tall and fearless. The main reason I say proud and fearless is because of the encounter with a Seminole warrior and William Bartram on page 351 in our packet. Bartram describes the stray rider "with dignity in his look and action..." in their exchange with one another. This to me shows that this Native American man was proud, respectful and fearless, especially to ride up on Bartram as he did.

Earlier in my post, I said "he" when describing the "New World Body" because I picture a man. In the readings the writers talked mostly about their interactions with the males. There were a few descriptions of females, but the males seemed to play a bigger part to the people telling the story. As a representational figure, I think the descriptions the authors give shoes how the people of the "New World" are powerful, but because of how different the Native Americans' and the European travelers' customs are, the Native Americans are seen are barbarians.

In looking at the pictures of the people on the of the map of the "New World" I see some similarities to what I pictured. Although there was not an exact duplicate to what was in my head, the similarities I noticed were that the figures were not ever fully clothed and that the people were always holding something in their hands. I'm not sure why I pictured the figures of the "New World" with objects in your hands, but it was something that I noticed my figure had in common with the drawings.

Prompt #1

In my environment, bodies function in many different ways. One of the environments I am in every single day, usually for a decent amount of time is my apartment. My apartment complex is a body of many different people from different families and different backgrounds. I live off of E. Riverside, which is known to a bad part of town. The body of my apartment complex does nothing to help change this idea. The people I live around, as a whole, are very inconsiderate of the rest of the people that live here. Just in the apartments around me, people fail to pick up any trash they may drop in the short trip to the dumpster and constantly pile up trash around, not in, the dumpster. The body of residents in my apartment complex live up to the expectations of the Riverside community.

With my rant about about my unhappiness about my living situation over, at work I encounter a vast amounts of bodies on a daily basis. As an optician, I provide service to many people. People from every type of body you can think of need some kind of vision correction. I have helped doctors, military personal, students, policemen, teachers, and of course, the elderly. Of those groups of people, I have been in contact with those looking to stir some kind of trouble, those who are just looking for a bargain, those who know what they want, those who are indecisive about the many options they are given and many more.

Those of you who have worked retail have experienced the true essence of people and how self-centered and ignorant they can be. Although many people exude said essence, there are some who are very kind and are easy to deal with. These are the two main bodies I separate customers in when at work. This to me is an example of their personal body. It seems as if customers feel like they have two choices: Show respect for someone performing you a service because they don't necessarily have to, or on the other hand, show little to no respect because the retailer is not someone they know, therefore it does not matter how they are treated.

From what I see almost every day at the university, the student body doesn't really forget about the bodies they are a part of. The different bodies people are involved in can be the cliques they follow. In every large class I've had, athletes sit together based on what sport they play (football players with football players and baseball players with baseball players for example), people of the same race tend to stick together, and people who tend to know each other stay together as well. Each small group can be considered they're own body. Everyone knows that's how it happens because everybody does it. Bodies and who forms those bodies are important to all parts of our society. As a general public people are broken down into different bodies such as upper and middle class, grade levels among student, graduate and undergraduate just to name a few.

I believe, in today's electronic world, our bodies can still be considered fundamental markers of our identities. One example of this, in my eyes, is tattoos and various other body art. To me, tattoos are a way of expressing who you are inside and your emotions. Tattoos, in most occasions, are things that are very personal because they will be a part of you for the rest of you life. Most of the time people pick to design their skin with something that is very close to their soul such as a name of someone they loved who passed away or an image to represent a hardship they had to overcome at some point in their lifetime. The clothing we choose is another way that I feel is still a very relevant way we exude our identities. I like to wear shirts and hats with my favorite sports shirts. Sports are a huge part of my life. I played baseball for over 10 years and am studying to gain a career in the sports industry. Those shirts and hats are a small portal to my heart and soul. Those teams, as for many other sports fans, are what we base our year and sometimes our schedules on. Whether our teams win or lose is something that can easily make or ruin our day, week or even longer.