Napier's "Akira and Ranma 1/2: The Monstrous Adolescent" discusses the two anime works and states examples of the "liminal" or in-between-states of both. Some of these examples include
From these examples she decodes that the anime films "unhappy antiheroism" is inspiring to many. Napier said it further represents a "form of all-out adolescent resistance to an increasingly meaningless world in which oppressive authority figures administer the rules simply to continue in power." Wow. I don't mean to sound ignorant at all but I would have never thought an anime film could convey such strong themes. I knew nothing about anime films previous to reading this essay so I had no idea that it also had such dark subject matter. The decoding of the metamorphosis in Akira was decoded by Napier to have two major themes of an alienated youth's search for identity and a "cyberpunk meditation on apocolypse."
Like Akira, Ranma 1/2 has themes of identity and traditional situations in society during adolescence. I'm confused as of the opening episode's plot with a panda, and two naked gender-confused Chinese boys? girls? confronting each other in the nude...but I understand how it somehow has similar themes as Akira. Gender identities and sexism are definetly relevant in the beginning scenes, and as the little girl says to her father that she should be able to choose her fiancee, strong feminist themes are shown. Further themes of homosexuality and androgyny are expressed in Ranma and
According to Napier, the works say different things about perceptions of and preoccupations with gender roles and relations, inter-generational relations, tradition, history and the future in Japan. Japan's many lonesome people could relate to the lonely characters in the animes and feelings associated with changes in their lives that take place over adolescence. The motorcycle scene that represents the "phallic symbol of power and authority" (according to film scholar Jon Lewis) seems reasonable but at first to me seems kind of rediculously over analyzed and I don't know how non-adults who watched the anime film watched that scene and saw underlying themes such as those. The motorcycle scene could represent many things and I'm sure the movie was very emotionally mature and moving in a sense, but I am still having trouble understanding how one can watch a cartoon and instantly grasp all of the underlying themes and representation of different themes...
Anime productions such as these so popular in America, according to Napier, because of their elements of relatable adult themes such as dystopia and apocolypse.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Architecture After Couture Reaction
In "Architecture After Couture," Varnelis examines and analyzes the modern fashions of today with the art of buildings. The integration of fashion and architecture has evolved over time and couture fashion itself is constructed in a way similar to buildings. When I think of the word 'couture' many images come into my head, and most of them are of large dramaticly constructed dresses of abstract shapes and built with such depth and length of material that they resemble buildings. Couture gowns are often known to be over the top with glamour and structure, and even couture makeup is complex and far from ordinary. Haute couture is literally translated from french as "high sewing" and is defined in Webster's dictionary as "the houses or designers that create exclusive and often trend-setting fashions for women." Although haute couture fashion is not ready-to-wear for the modern woman, it sets the stakes high and determines the background trends that ready-to-wear designers use in their more wearable clothes, such as interpretation of certain shapes such as bubble hem or certain colors or fabric.
Like architecture, couture fashion evolves over the years and changes to the modernity of today's culture. According to Varnelis, changes in architecture must occur in order to provide new fashion trends in haute couture. He writes that architecture students often look to fashion magazines such as Flaunt for inspiration. Varnelis argues that fashion and architecture have similiar purposes in society; to build and display class differences in society.
When Varnelis wrote that after the 1960s, "difference is no longer the property of the elite," he meant that after the Mod culture ended, everyone broke free from the scene where everyone looked the same trend and broke free into different subcultures. With the evolving fashion, everyone interpreted it differently and people of every social class was able to embrace the trends. After many centuries where looking fashionable and owning trendy of-the-moment clothes defined the class you were in, and only the high class elitists could wear them, thus defining the rule of fashion being that only the elite could wear them. During this time, haute couture designers such as Yves Saint Laurent and Dior reproduced 'street' looks populare at the time and mad them high-fashion, and ever since then, fashion was 'doomed,' according to Varnelis. This is just an early example of designers declaring new fashion trends and being credited with starting new trends when in actuality the trends were already apparent in society but in the streets worn by the non-elitists such as the hippies in the '60s. A more modern example of this is the infamous first line by Marc Jacobs who introduced the grunge look of the '90s into the fashion world, making flannel shirts and doc martens trendy when they were already being worn by all teenagers who were apart of the original grunge movement in rock'n'roll. A more recent example is the terrorist scarves worn by many in America and made popular in European countries such as Denmark and Sweden when they are traditional arabic scarves that represent, to many, war and terrorism. These scarves were available by mainstream trendy store Urban Outfitters but was taken out of the catalog after being labeled the "terrorist scarf." Many reproductions of this scarf with hearts on them, ironicly, are available at stores like H&M.
Fashion is interpreted and many reproduced all over and high-fashion trends are sold at cheaper stores such as Target, as mentioned in "Architecture After Couture" and many people, including myself, can agree it is nice to be able to buy replicas of designer outfits for cheap because all of us cannot afford the actual items but identify with the fashionable culture today and everyone is desperate to be a part of the high fashion of the modern couture elitists in society.
According to Varnelis, the change that must occur in architecture to evolve fashion is
Like architecture, couture fashion evolves over the years and changes to the modernity of today's culture. According to Varnelis, changes in architecture must occur in order to provide new fashion trends in haute couture. He writes that architecture students often look to fashion magazines such as Flaunt for inspiration. Varnelis argues that fashion and architecture have similiar purposes in society; to build and display class differences in society.
When Varnelis wrote that after the 1960s, "difference is no longer the property of the elite," he meant that after the Mod culture ended, everyone broke free from the scene where everyone looked the same trend and broke free into different subcultures. With the evolving fashion, everyone interpreted it differently and people of every social class was able to embrace the trends. After many centuries where looking fashionable and owning trendy of-the-moment clothes defined the class you were in, and only the high class elitists could wear them, thus defining the rule of fashion being that only the elite could wear them. During this time, haute couture designers such as Yves Saint Laurent and Dior reproduced 'street' looks populare at the time and mad them high-fashion, and ever since then, fashion was 'doomed,' according to Varnelis. This is just an early example of designers declaring new fashion trends and being credited with starting new trends when in actuality the trends were already apparent in society but in the streets worn by the non-elitists such as the hippies in the '60s. A more modern example of this is the infamous first line by Marc Jacobs who introduced the grunge look of the '90s into the fashion world, making flannel shirts and doc martens trendy when they were already being worn by all teenagers who were apart of the original grunge movement in rock'n'roll. A more recent example is the terrorist scarves worn by many in America and made popular in European countries such as Denmark and Sweden when they are traditional arabic scarves that represent, to many, war and terrorism. These scarves were available by mainstream trendy store Urban Outfitters but was taken out of the catalog after being labeled the "terrorist scarf." Many reproductions of this scarf with hearts on them, ironicly, are available at stores like H&M.
Fashion is interpreted and many reproduced all over and high-fashion trends are sold at cheaper stores such as Target, as mentioned in "Architecture After Couture" and many people, including myself, can agree it is nice to be able to buy replicas of designer outfits for cheap because all of us cannot afford the actual items but identify with the fashionable culture today and everyone is desperate to be a part of the high fashion of the modern couture elitists in society.
According to Varnelis, the change that must occur in architecture to evolve fashion is
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Hebdige's Subculture
"...Way down down down in this subbacultcha...
drug running on this Panamanian schooner
and we listen to the sea
and look at the sky in a poetic kind of way"-Pixies
(not related at all but the song Subbacultcha came into my head as soon as I read the title...music a.d.d, I know.)
"We like noise, it's our choice
It's what we wanna do
We don't care about long hairs
I don't wear flares"-Sex Pistols
In Chapter 6, "The Unnatural Break," of Hebdige's work "Subculture," he writes about noise "as opposed to sound" and how as it represents events in life through different medias. He describes noise as anarchic and disorderly, and undefinable in a way. He relates sound in subculture to an underlying nature which shapes social classes and order in the world. The title of the chapter relates to the 'unnatural' way certain subcultures in society shun consciousness of class and difference and law breaking. Hebdige uses the British punk band the Sex Pistols as an example of a subculture involved in Anarchy including cursing on tv and in their songs and throwing up/spitting, which are known as taboos in society. During the rise in their popularity most of the media was definetly in a frenzy over their crazy antics and rebellion from society at the time, so the press was in hysteria. This hysteria 'fluctuates between dread and fascination, outrage and amusment.' The Sex Pistols definetly shook up society by cutting themselves on stage and creating headlines such as "Rotten Razored" and creating many wannabe's and copycat bands in the process of their own subculture. This anarchy subculture was defined by 'anti-social acts' which caused the police to react negatively (and of course, when the police get involved the 'fuck the police' motifs become a greater part in that certain subculture.)
Visually and verbally, subculture becomes marketable in many ways through the media; Hebdige refers to an early newspaper article describing the Sex Pistols' punk clothing style, which basically prompted millions to go out and try to dress and act the same, because, as mentioned before, the tabboos of society were fascinating and being anti-social and becoming a part of that subculture was a trend. The Sex Pistols' fashion became a definite symbol of the punk subculture and an easily recognizable way of coding/labelling someone into that genre of society. Both punk and mod fashions at some point changed from a way of life in a subculture into high fashion in society and even mainstream, as the designer Vivienne Westwood most famously did. The marketable success from a culture seems odd from what started as a little-known scene taking place in small record shops and quickly expanding (with the help of the media exploitations) into a greater known fashion statement and fad. Once the clothes of this subculture became available to the general population, they had a different meaning because they were now being made on a larger scale, as opposed to the original D.I.Y. style of the original punks. In the same way that many trends today are 'faux vintage' and wearing what appears to be hand-me-downs but is actually an expensive shirt, fashion destroys the true meaning of subcultures. Hebdige defines the processes of the subuculture formation as the ideological form, which is more of classifying and identifying the people in a certain subculture.
Hebdige also describes the subculture's demonstrated codes such as ripped T-shirts...I'm confused by how he defines the word codes in this sense, but I'm assuming he uses the word to describe the thought out (or not thought out?) sense of being in these subcultures. It's interesting that Hebdige says any one of Duchamps ready-mades can be a part of punk's (un)fashion including a razor blade or tampon. It's odd to me he focusses so much on material objects and fashion (such as the fabrics, designs, and colors) and forms of dancing as a means of defining a subculture when it meant so much more than that.
In relation to Hall, Hebdige also studies the signs and elements in behavior of cultures, along with communication, language, gesture, and clothing. Hebdige, like Hall, attempts to "decode" society by ways of the media. Hebdige's Subculture also relates to Adorno's essay on patterns in mass culture because he said it is "impossible to dodge" popular culture, and it affects everyone. The punk subculture affected everyone, whether they liked it or not. It was loud, in your face, and demanded attention, which it got plenty of, by the media. The media, which was, most of the time, (much like Hebdige), too distracted by material objects of the punks (which by many people,is a lot to handle visually) to report/analyze/understand their political and anarchy views on society. It's sad that something that started out with strong ideas and beliefs became a trend focused on money and buying things to look a certain way. I respect the punk subculture and its music, despite the fact that I don't walk around with pins or bright colored hair. As Adorno explained, art in any form no longer had its original meaning after it was taken over and reproduced by mass media culture.
drug running on this Panamanian schooner
and we listen to the sea
and look at the sky in a poetic kind of way"-Pixies
(not related at all but the song Subbacultcha came into my head as soon as I read the title...music a.d.d, I know.)
"We like noise, it's our choice
It's what we wanna do
We don't care about long hairs
I don't wear flares"-Sex Pistols
In Chapter 6, "The Unnatural Break," of Hebdige's work "Subculture," he writes about noise "as opposed to sound" and how as it represents events in life through different medias. He describes noise as anarchic and disorderly, and undefinable in a way. He relates sound in subculture to an underlying nature which shapes social classes and order in the world. The title of the chapter relates to the 'unnatural' way certain subcultures in society shun consciousness of class and difference and law breaking. Hebdige uses the British punk band the Sex Pistols as an example of a subculture involved in Anarchy including cursing on tv and in their songs and throwing up/spitting, which are known as taboos in society. During the rise in their popularity most of the media was definetly in a frenzy over their crazy antics and rebellion from society at the time, so the press was in hysteria. This hysteria 'fluctuates between dread and fascination, outrage and amusment.' The Sex Pistols definetly shook up society by cutting themselves on stage and creating headlines such as "Rotten Razored" and creating many wannabe's and copycat bands in the process of their own subculture. This anarchy subculture was defined by 'anti-social acts' which caused the police to react negatively (and of course, when the police get involved the 'fuck the police' motifs become a greater part in that certain subculture.)
Visually and verbally, subculture becomes marketable in many ways through the media; Hebdige refers to an early newspaper article describing the Sex Pistols' punk clothing style, which basically prompted millions to go out and try to dress and act the same, because, as mentioned before, the tabboos of society were fascinating and being anti-social and becoming a part of that subculture was a trend. The Sex Pistols' fashion became a definite symbol of the punk subculture and an easily recognizable way of coding/labelling someone into that genre of society. Both punk and mod fashions at some point changed from a way of life in a subculture into high fashion in society and even mainstream, as the designer Vivienne Westwood most famously did. The marketable success from a culture seems odd from what started as a little-known scene taking place in small record shops and quickly expanding (with the help of the media exploitations) into a greater known fashion statement and fad. Once the clothes of this subculture became available to the general population, they had a different meaning because they were now being made on a larger scale, as opposed to the original D.I.Y. style of the original punks. In the same way that many trends today are 'faux vintage' and wearing what appears to be hand-me-downs but is actually an expensive shirt, fashion destroys the true meaning of subcultures. Hebdige defines the processes of the subuculture formation as the ideological form, which is more of classifying and identifying the people in a certain subculture.
Hebdige also describes the subculture's demonstrated codes such as ripped T-shirts...I'm confused by how he defines the word codes in this sense, but I'm assuming he uses the word to describe the thought out (or not thought out?) sense of being in these subcultures. It's interesting that Hebdige says any one of Duchamps ready-mades can be a part of punk's (un)fashion including a razor blade or tampon. It's odd to me he focusses so much on material objects and fashion (such as the fabrics, designs, and colors) and forms of dancing as a means of defining a subculture when it meant so much more than that.
In relation to Hall, Hebdige also studies the signs and elements in behavior of cultures, along with communication, language, gesture, and clothing. Hebdige, like Hall, attempts to "decode" society by ways of the media. Hebdige's Subculture also relates to Adorno's essay on patterns in mass culture because he said it is "impossible to dodge" popular culture, and it affects everyone. The punk subculture affected everyone, whether they liked it or not. It was loud, in your face, and demanded attention, which it got plenty of, by the media. The media, which was, most of the time, (much like Hebdige), too distracted by material objects of the punks (which by many people,is a lot to handle visually) to report/analyze/understand their political and anarchy views on society. It's sad that something that started out with strong ideas and beliefs became a trend focused on money and buying things to look a certain way. I respect the punk subculture and its music, despite the fact that I don't walk around with pins or bright colored hair. As Adorno explained, art in any form no longer had its original meaning after it was taken over and reproduced by mass media culture.
Friday, September 21, 2007
Bordeau reading response
Although I didn't completely understand what bordeau was talking about, I agreed with his ideas of how certain motifs can define the identity of a society and people as individuals. I disagree with his analysis of defining gender by whether or not they induce"strong" food and drinks. The "principle of the division of foods between the sexes" is completely rediculous and stereotypical. Women don't sit around picking at 'tit-bits' of leftover food and weak drinks and aren't necessarily "satisfied with a small portion." I know many women who can eat as much if not more than men's meals of powerful food. Then Bordeau goes on to say how women depend on cosmetics to surrender to society's culture...I'm not really sure why he stereotypes genders so much but I understand that gender roles in society define the world we live in, and many times they can be true, but there are many different kinds people in society who's identities are largely defined by their eating habits. Both men and women are vegetarians and vegans and it has nothing to do with being strong or weak or gender roles in society, but personal beliefs on either environmental causes or otherwise. I was a vegetarian for 13 years not for environmental reasons or beliefs I just didn't like the taste of meat. Now as an anemic 18 year old, I have aquired the taste for beef and eat "manly" portions frequently.
Times have definetly changed since the days when women were constantly on their feet serving their husbands. This may have seemed like a good way of defining society in the past, but I'd like to think that there are more equal roles in families and living situations now and society cannot be determined by family roles alone. I agree that there is a certain art about the presentation of food; I consider art anything that has been thought out by the artist, with or without a purpose.
I found the table of data very interesting and I think it's kind of a strange way to analyze people (by their ways of "entertaining".) In my family,we rarely eat dinner together and when/if we do, it's not for entertainment purposes and even in larger family gatherings we never have organized entertainments such as games or singing after meals.
Bordeau goes on to anazlye other objects and ideas that define the middle class culture including shoes/clothes and self-presentation, and "petite bourgeoisie." Most of it to me came of as extremely biased and sexist although I understand that in culture, the way of defining them includes pointing out certain images and groups such as economic/social, education, homelife, wealth, genders and individual taste attribute to understanding the ways of middle class life.
Times have definetly changed since the days when women were constantly on their feet serving their husbands. This may have seemed like a good way of defining society in the past, but I'd like to think that there are more equal roles in families and living situations now and society cannot be determined by family roles alone. I agree that there is a certain art about the presentation of food; I consider art anything that has been thought out by the artist, with or without a purpose.
I found the table of data very interesting and I think it's kind of a strange way to analyze people (by their ways of "entertaining".) In my family,we rarely eat dinner together and when/if we do, it's not for entertainment purposes and even in larger family gatherings we never have organized entertainments such as games or singing after meals.
Bordeau goes on to anazlye other objects and ideas that define the middle class culture including shoes/clothes and self-presentation, and "petite bourgeoisie." Most of it to me came of as extremely biased and sexist although I understand that in culture, the way of defining them includes pointing out certain images and groups such as economic/social, education, homelife, wealth, genders and individual taste attribute to understanding the ways of middle class life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)