Final Reflection

Well, well, here we are. It’s incredibly hard to believe the quarter is already over and we are submitting final reflections. I can still remember looking at the syllabus on the first day and being confused at the idea of a class blog.  Blogging has been a very interesting and unique way of communicating with my classmates and trading ideas back and forth to really expand my outlook on the subjects we have discussed in pop culture.

To be perfectly honest, I had low expectations for this concept of “class blogs”.  I can remember discussing this concept with friends and explaining how I didn’t think it would work because people would not remember to do posts and the guidelines seemed ambiguous.  By the time the midterm requirement of 10 articles came around, I was proven very wrong. I have been incredibly impressed with the quality of everyones blogs, including myself, who’s skills I also doubted.  There have been blogs I have read from classmates that make me laugh, become outraged, feel enlightened and every other emotion you can think of.  Another surprise has been that almost each time I have replied to someone’s post, it is not just ignored and forgotten about. When I argue with classmates they take the time to respond again and discuss the ideas further, sometimes even taking the discussion outside of the classroom.  The Blogs have exceeded far past my expectations again and again.

There are multiple things I have learned from this assignment. First and foremost is simply the process of blogging. Prior to this class I had had maybe a livejournal blog where i would right unformatted one line thoughts or whatever I wanted my friends to read, but this was my first time keeping an academic and professional quality blog.  I feel now like I could successfully enter a workplace where if they ask me “can you handle upkeep for the company blog?”, I can reply with a fully confident “yes.”  Another thing I have learned is not a completely new skill but it has at least helped increase my ability to look at all sides of an argument.  Reading 20 some peoples opinions on the same subject has been a really useful way to understand everyones different points of view and at times I have even been persuaded to change my own.  One last thing I have gained from this blog is a better grasp on what Pop Culture really is. At the beginning of the class I thought Pop Culture seemed too ambiguous with no boundaries, but through this assignment I feel I have gained the skills or tools to examine Pop Culture the right way and have gotten a firmer grasp on what all Pop Culture really entails.

I think my post that showcases my best work is my entry titled “Slaaaaaayyyyyyyyerrrrrrrrrrrrr!” Honestly, I made a lot of entries that I thoroughly enjoyed writing and feel really express my opinion, but I think in retrospect this article really does a good job of looking at both sides of the argument.  I feel that I do a good job of explaining what I think it means to be a fan, and the video fit perfectly for what I wanted to say with the entry. As soon as I read the sentence about metal fans, I thought to myself: “YES! I have the perfect artifact for this!!!” I feel that the article does well by providing some merit with the other side of the argument when I admit that at times the fan in the video does appear to be crazy or insane, but then I go back and explain why I think fandom can account for this in a positive way.

I feel that my weakest entry was coincidently my first entry, “Betraying One’s Culture…..Or Not?” I felt like although I did a good job of explaining my opinion on the subject and laying out why I disagreed with Klosterman, I could have improved the post and made it a lot more valuable if I would have been able to find more sources to exemplify my point.  I remember writing the entry and thinking “alright, I know a lot of people will agree with me, so it will be easy to find sources of people complaining about their culture being made mainstream,” but then when it was time to find examples, it just didn’t really pan out for me.  I feel like anyone who agreed with me knew what I was talking about, but it was still not as good as it could have been because there was not a sufficient amount of evidence to persuade anyone who came into my entry agreeing with Klosterman.

If I had to do a similar project over again there is one main thing I would change: I would follow the instructor’s helpful advice of writing one entry a week. I didn’t ever end up writing the majority of my blog in one night, I was able to spread them out somewhat, but I often found myself writing 2 or 3 entries at a time which I feel limits the time frame that I spent thinking about the subjects from the class.  It truly is hard to evenly divide a project like this when there are no set dates, but I think from this I will be able next time to work it out so I am dividing the entries as evenly as possible, writing about subjects as they come up, not a week before or after we discuss them.

Well guys, I guess this is where we go our separate ways.  It’s been fun debating and discussing with all of you and I hope at least someone (Dave Polster does not count) was able to gain some insight from some of my entries, or at least look at an argument from a different point of view.  All in all this has been an extremely valuable experience, and probably the highlight of the class.  EVen if I never see any of you again, at least we will forever be united in the RSS feed of wordpress on the internet…Live long and prosper!

-Spencer Radcliffe

Reality Rubbish

First of all, It is sad to think this is my last post outside of the final reflection. It’s been a good long run blog, it’s been real and it’s been fun. Anyways, in Reality TV Breeds New Star System, Brian Lowry gives his input on what seems to be the ongoing battle of celebrity versus uncelebrity. Lowry says, “No channel has been more aggressive about wringing additional uses from its reality chattel than VH1, which saw that strategy conspicuously blow up in its face. Ryan Jenkins, who committed suicide after allegedly murdering his ex-wife, model Jasmine Fiore, had appeared in “Megan Wants a Millionaire,” which the channel abruptly pulled after only a few episodes, and the third edition of “I Love Money,” which has also been scrapped” (Lowry 2009).  I feel like this is a good observation on the difference between a reality “star” and just garbage. I honestly do believe that some people from reality TV can be considered stars, someone who repeatedly boosts the ratings of a show and is able to maintain their career over various shows without the world turning on them has at least some skills. MY problem is with shows like those mentioned by Lowery where the network spews out 20 new shows that all get cancelled before anyone ever is aware of their existence. i feel like if television must keep producing reality TV, they could at least have it be well thought out and not just worthless spin offs of their old shows and half baked ideas. here is my favorite examples of one of those half baked spin offs:

For those of you already familiar with I Love New York, please save yourself the time and don’t watch this video. For those of you lucky ones who have never seen it, I’m sorry I have to put you through this nonsense.

Now not only is I Love New York a pointless spin off love search for a contestant who didn’t win on a previous show, the previous show, The Flavor of Love, was just as pointless also! I am not hating on Public Enemy but we all know Flava Flav is not looking for love and if he were I wouldn’t care to see it. so why do I care about someone who didn’t even win the show??

Essentially, I feel like when reality television is done right, it is ok for “stars” to stem. My problem is when they start spewing out one too many shows to the point where you can’t even keep up anymore.  Why waste the time to write a show thats going to get cancelled anyway. Maybe if they took some more time to think these shows out, I would have got to see Bromances before it was cancelled shortly after being released, which I am just positive was a work of art.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Lowry, B. (2009). “Reality TV Breeds New Star System”. Variety.

RE: What Did I Just Watch?

This is a response to C.C Wilson’s blog entry found here:

http://camplongrun.wordpress.com/2009/11/15/what-did-i-just-watch/

Once I started reading through this blog, it was really hard to choose between which article to respond to as they were all really interesting to me, I actually wish I would have checked out this blog to respond ot it sooner but regardless:

In “What Did I Just Watch?”, C.C gives some well deserved praise to the “mind-bending” sub genre of film discussed by Steven Johnson in Everything bad is Good for You.

C.C. linked us to a very cool list of films, some of which I now plan to check out on my own (please come through for me Alden Library), but I felt like there were a few good ones missing that I really felt the need to let any fellow fans know about.

Here is Pi, a classic film about a man who becomes obsessed with patterns in numbers. A must see, especially for fans of Memento.

Next, this is one that i frankly cannot believe did not make it on to the list:

Requiem For a Dream is a film that loosely follows multiple drug addicts and their slow path to delusion. I cannot describe it much more, you just have to see this one.

Finally, my own personal favorite movie of all time:

Being John Malkovich, a story about literally being John Malkovich is a movie i knew i would absolutely love when my parents rented it when i was in junior high and said they hated it and didn’t understand it at all. Years later I bought it and the rest is history. I beg anyone who has never seen this to pick it up and watch with an open mind and allow your brain to expand!

Interesting = Identifiable?

In “What Happens When People Stop Being Polite,” an excerpt from Chuck Klosterman’s infamous Sex, Drugs And Coco Puffs, Klosterman takes an insightful look at the tragic irony in the name The Real World, possibly one of the most unrealistic shows to ever hit television. Klosterman makes a lot of good observations on the inner workings of how a show about absolutely nothing is chopped and edited to make the final product seem interesting, but the quote that sticks out and resonates most in my mind is when he writes, “being interesting has been replaced by being identifiable” (40).  I cannot help in mine own observations of popular culture but to whole-heartedly agree.  Now I want to start by saying that my opinion, as always, should be taken with a grain of salt because I always try to put myself on both sides of an argument and sometimes end up switching sides when trying to formulate my argument.  I thought about saying something along the lines of “Yeah! I agree! Look at Paris Hilton, she does nothing and everyone knows who she is!”  But then I started thinking and though back to my entry on uncelebrity and decided: what makes someone “interesting” is completely subjective.  Someone identifiable may not seem interesting to you, but someone may be really interested in how Paris hilton has made herself famous. Some may argue money made her famous but I believe there was also some personal effort involved.  Now lets look at someone identifiable that people often regard as “interesting” or “talented”:

Here is the trailer for Jennifer’s Body, a movie from earlier this year starring supposed “acting sensation” Megan Fox as a possessed sexy cheerleader.  My humble opinion is that the only thing “interesting” to some about this “starlet” is her looks and as referred to in the title, her “body”.  I am not bashing any Megan Fox fans out there, but at the same time I want to make it clear that it seems equally unfair to bash the careers of Paris Hilton or Real World stars (and yes, they are making money, it is a career).  Its like the old saying goes, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” and what Klosterman might think is uninteresting, I believe that there is at least someone out there who will find it interesting. I find organic chemistry uninteresting but I have plenty of friends who think it is one of the most fascinating things out there.

Any Chuck Klosterman supporters out there wanna jump in and give me a run for my money? Feel free! Just wanna show some love for Megan Fox? Well you can keep that one to yourself…

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Klosterman, C. (2004). “When People Stop Being Polite.” Sex, Drugs, and Coco Puffs. New York: Scribner.

Re: Re: Vampires

This is a response to Megan Owens’s post found right here:

http://megrachelle49.wordpress.com/2009/11/07/reply-to-vampires-take-a-bite-out-of-pop-culture/

I just wanted to reach a helping hand out to the insulted Buffy fan and say: you are not alone in your annoyance with the influx of vampiric culture/fanatics etc.  I have found myself annoyed at times also; I used to just have to hear my friends who liked the books drone on at school before it gained critical acclaim and became a movie, so you can imagine my distaste when I saw the preview and witnessed those who would have made fun of them previously now gushing over the ever desireable Edward Cullen.  Thankfully, to my pleasing, a couple weeks ago I was watching Saturday Night Live and saw this gem:

This is a trailer for “Firelight,” a perfectly executed satire that seems to be laughing at not only twilight, but the popularity of vampire culture in general by replacing vampires with frankensteins.  It is uplifting that you can always count on popular culture to acknowledge when things are getting out of hand, even if it is usually their own doing.  For those “true” vampire fans out there, I suggest you protect your dignity this weekend and stay indoors for the premiere of New Moon and save yourself the hassle of being consumed by a crowd of crazed thirteen year old girls.

Slaaaaaayyyyyyyyerrrrrrrrrrrrr!

Hello again all, and welcome to my observations on a subject that I assume we have all became relatively savvy to; fandom.  My input is however crazy some fans or fan groups may seem, often appearing as a cult or mob, I find myself agreeing with Jenson in her accolades to protect the sanctity and the honor of what is fandom.  I want to focus on one of the larger fan groups, fans of metal music.  Jenson says that “Metal fans are characterized, especially by concerned parents, as vulnerable youngsters who have become “twisted” in response to the brutal and Satanic influence of the music,” and I agree with him that he says these wild assumptions are “absolutely untrue” (12).  I feel that as with most things that people become fans of, but especially with music, it is just a binding force that brings people together. Music in its purest form is just human expression of emotions, so for the masses of fans it is simply as way to connect with others who have the same feelings or emotions that you do. I might add at this point that although I don’t dislike it, I am not really a big listener of metal music but I do see the merit. At this point, I would like to offer up to you, the image of a Slayer fan at its best. (for those of you who don’t know, Slayer is a widely recognized heavy metal band):

As you can see, there are definitely moments in this interview when the typical fan could be seen as crazy (i.e.: 1:40 when the fan lets out one of the most epic battle cries I’ve ever heard), but if you pay attention to what he is saying when he isn’t crying out to his metal gods, you’ll notice he is mostly talking about the camaraderie and connection Slayer fans feel with one another.  Sure there may be the exceptions of fans who are actually crazy (though you will find crazy people in every group), Metal fandom, and all types of fandom alike. is just an outlet for connection with other people who have the same values, priorities, and thoughts as you.

Agree? Disagree? Any Slayer fans out there who can verify this as an accurate image of a “Slayer fan”?

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Jenson, J. (1992). Fandom as Pathology. Routledge.

Those we Love to Hate (A Response)

This is a response to Dominic Pellegrino’s entry found here:

http://mp743105.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/why-play-the-villain/

Dominic was talking about Brock Lesner being disrespectful to fans and it reminded me of a really great video I saw some time ago and had to share with anyone who may have not been so lucky to come across it.

Here we see none other than John Cena who wikipedia graciously refers to as “an American actor, hip hop musician, and professional wrestler.”  I think any of us who have seen The Marine no that “actor” is loosely used here.  What we see here is Cena “freestyle battling” a WWE wrestling fan in which he even makes a slight about the man being homosexual.  The one underlying fact that seems apparent to me here is what makes all the difference: It is all fake. Staged. An act. I think the same can be said for Brock Lesner also, as this applies to all “professional Wrestling” such as the WWF, WCW, WWE etc.  They create these rivalries and stage drama to create controversy and I think that just goes to show that being a “villain” definitely is attractive. They know thats what people like to see; who would want to watch their favorite massive pro wrestler hugging and complementing their fans? We want them to be mean and unapologetic, so that is what they give us.

Dominic said “we need the good guy to root for and the bad guy to hate,” but I think in the world of professional wrestling, it’s really all subjective as one fan’s villain is the other fan’s hero.  My hope is that when it all comes down to it, they are all pretty nice guys just playing a role, but who knows; maybe the WWE is full of jerks looking for an outlet.

Thoughts anyone?

Leave American Idol Alone!

Now let me start out by saying that in writing this, I find myself in an unexpected position. I am by no means an American Idol “fan,” let alone a “loyal,” so by no means am I fighting for or protecting my own kind.  In fact, I am pretty sure I have never seen a full episode of the show, but I have seen enough to understand what Henry Jenkins is talking about in Convergence Culture when he says “audience participation is a way of getting American Idol viewers more deeply invested, shoring up their loyalty to the franchise and its sponsors” (70). Let me make myself clear though, by “understand what he means,” I am not saying I agree.  I do believe that the participatory nature of the show does help earn more dedicated fans, but i don’t believe that it some evil corporate plot to brainwash you into buying coca cola and American Idol tote bags. ALmost every TV show has done some sort of participatory promotion or aspect at some point to get more people interested, its just another method the industry uses. It seems like common sense almost, let the people get involved if you want them to get interested.

Here are some other examples I’ve found of the use of fan participation in television:

Here at Madmenyourself.com and Southparkstudios.com, you can literally put yourself into the world of the show, by making an animated version of yourself. In the case of South Park, you even have the chance of getting your animated self put in the show.  DO I think that these shows are trying to trick you into buying merchandise and supporting the franchise? No, to be honest, I do not. I feel that yes it is promotional, so it is to promote their show, it is also just what the fans want. We live in a world where people want to be involved in the shows they enjoy and they want the content, to span across as many platforms as possible.

Also, since American Idol’s success, many shows have implemented audience voting techniques such as America’s Best Dance Crew, Top Chef, Project Runway, and many more.

So to sum it all up, I am not on board with Jenkins implying that the use of audience participation is just some trap to suck you into buying things and supporting the sponsors. Feel free to disagree, I am a fan of Convergence Culture so I may be easily swayed to Jenkins’s ways, just not by his own convincing…

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture. New York: NYU Press

Scooters made of Gold(en rubber) (A Response)

This is a response to Dave Polster’s Entry found here:

http://thatcamel392.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/growing-up-with-logos-and-legos-in-the-90s/

Ah, the Razor Scooter. It takes me back to a time when every kid’s dreams were filled with images of them cruising down the highway on these beautiful vehicles made of steel. What drew us to you Razor? Was it your oh os soft colorful foam handlebars, or was it the matching see through wheels? Well, that christmas (and some birthdays in between) half of these kids’ dreams came true, their parents fought the legions of scooter buyers through the twisting paths of department stores and managed to grab that last box reading RAZOR, peacefully resting under a large price tag announcing to the world, $120.00 (not mentioning the hospital bills that would be paid by the parents of the more ambitious children who would try things like riding off the shed roof in the backyard).

Now lets assume for some reason I can’t even think up for arguments sake, well ok lets go with the ever popular “nostalgia,” I wanted to buy one of these useless machines. Naturally I would go for the ever popular see through green and instinctively, my first thought would be the ever loveable Wall Mart:

Yes, thats right: 27.97, an incredibly small fraction of what we were paying back then. “What happened?”, one may ask. Has their quality gone down? Did they find an abandoned warehouse somewhere full of see through colorful rubber? No friends, this is simply another prime example of branding. Those parents who forked out the $120 dollars knew their children would end up just like little Dave Polster with his knock off if they didn’t go all out. Once again, the masses fell victim to something as worthless as a vinyl sticker across your scooter reading “RAZOR.”

If only we could have been wiser than to fall for their tricks, perhaps we all could have saved a hundred bucks, and maybe little Dave Polster would not have suffered years of ridicule for his cheap off brand. (Seriously though, look at that kid! What does that thing say, Tazor?? Doesn’t even have a wheely bar…)

What Separates an Uncelebrirty from a Celebrity

Heather Havrilesky’s “The Triumph of the Uncelebrity” seems to be a cry for answers as to why we are more interested in what she deems “uncelebrity’s” than real celebrities.  This really got me thinking about what makes someone into an uncelebrity and in turn, what makes someone into a “real” celebrity. I cam to the conclusion that in my own humble opinion, there is no real need for a distinction between the two.  Havrilesky asks “As unsavory and omnipresent as the uncelebrity circus might be, is it really any mystery why the incoherent,self-involved ramblings of a freak show like Octo-Mom would capture our interest far more than an up-close and personal interview with Mariska Hargitay in her four-bedroom Hollywood Hills bungalow?” (2009), and I think to myself, wait…I would rather see neither of those things!  It seems to me that if we are going to attack the “uncelebrity,” my question is why do you care so much about the lives of those you deem “real” celebrities?  Sure, you may say they have some sort of skill, usually acting, but these people are obviously doing some acting in front of the cameras themselves to keep the camera on them, so what makes them any worse than “real” celebrity’s who we shouldn’t care about anyways.

Look at some of the things we will pay to read about what we consider “real” celebrities:

I don’t know about you guys, but I could not care less about the financial argument of two washed up twin actresses, stolen personal thoughts of an aging pop “star”, or the eating patterns of people I’ll never know.  I feel like Havrilesky was on the right track, asking us why we care about “uncelebrities,” but I feel like it leads to a deeper questioning of why do we care about any celebrity at all?

Do you care about celebrities?  Do you think they are worthy of being obsessed over? Are celebrities and uncelebrities the same? different? Let me know what you think.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Havrilesky, H. (2009). “The Triumph of the Uncelebrity.” Salon. <http://www.salon.com/ent/tv/feature/2009/06/04/uncelebrity_scandal/print.html>