#but I do think that it's relevant to how Ted thinks of Henry | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

itsclydebitches · 11 months

Text

Continuing my perhaps delusional argument/hope that Ted permanently returning to Kansas is just a red herring, I was thinking about our references and callbacks this episode. Specifically, how they don't paint Kansas in a positive or unique light.

The Wizard of Oz pinball game is definitely the most on-the-nose nod to his return, yet in the scene itself Ted is literally refusing to play.

When we get a closeup on the machine we're shown Dorothy's house spinning out of control. That is, a moment when she leaves Kansas for the bright world of Oz, not the ruby slippers of her return.

Similarly, Beard loses his game before Ted walks over. The ending of the Wicked Witch is one wherein Dorothy (Ted) does not go back home.

(I'm not entirely sure what to do with this one yet, but having Mae quote "This Be the Verse" is certainly A Choice. Though I think the overall message -- people, specifically parents, will inevitably hurt their kids -- is an uplifting and very relevant argument within Ted Lasso's heartfelt context -- ergo we should acknowledge that we'll never be perfect while still striving to improve -- but that last line? Oof. "Get out early as you can / And don't have kids yourself"? That's not the proposed solution I'd expect for an episode that was sending Ted back to his son for good. Obviously Ted already has Henry, but it may be significant that Mae eschews a generic 'You can do it!' argument for a far more nuanced and harder to swallow conclusion, perhaps one that heralds Ted's controversial decision to stay separated from Henry for at least part of the year.)

(Also let's toss in the fact that Dottie uses a football metaphor -- not American football -- to describe how Ted needs to parent: sometimes you lose, sometimes you win, mostly you just tie, and all you can do it keep playing.)

Finally, we've got references to both BBQ sauce and sunflowers via Ted's WiFi password and the bread Dottie bakes him, Ted's "favorite."

Half a season ago these would have been straightforward references to Kansas, positive ones at that. However, post-S3E6 (literally titled "Sunflowers") Ted has both of these beloved objects tied to the UK instead. He enjoys the beauty of Van Gogh's Sunflowers in the Amsterdam museum and finds a BBQ sauce so good that it inspires him to (hopefully!) win it all in his English sport.

It might just be me reading into things because I'm looking for my preferred ending to the series... but also I don't think I am because it's weird that Kansas is continually framed as a negative this season. Ted is still super awkward with Michelle. Her new boyfriend is kinda awful and likewise makes him incredibly uncomfortable (understandably). The Wizard of Oz references aren't targeting the happy aspects of the story, or even the parts about going home. The symbolic references to Ted's beloved state (sunflowers, BBQ sauce, the little green army men) have all been integrated into his life here. We get a whole episode about how once Ted learns to focus on Henry instead of Michelle, Henry has a fantastic time living in London. Hell, this episode opens with Ted enthusiastically greeting everyone he passes on his walk, a beloved member of the community, a staple of this town... and then his mood turns sour when he hits his Kansas-sprung mom.

Obviously Ted is undergoing some last-minute growth when it comes to being a father to Henry (and healing the rift with Dottie), but I think Ted's in-universe improvement is misleading, implying that because he may think he needs to return to Kansas, that's actually how the story is going to end. If that were the end-goal though, I would expect the subtext to have a more hopeful, optimistic feel to it; something that not just implies Ted's return, but argues why he would want to outside of Henry.

If none of that is relevant... that's going to be even worse for me than Ted just going back to Kansas. A Kansas ending framed as a positive is far from my preference, but it's (arguably) a strong conclusion to Ted's journey. A Kansas ending after all these implied negatives both isn't my preference and feels like more objectively bad writing.

#Ted Lasso #Ted Lasso spoilers #look if I was writing the show #all the Dorothy references would be a deliberate mislead #actually culminating in a 'Ted is a friend of Dorothy's' reveal #but sadly I do not have this power lol #mymetas

121 notes · View notes

wheelercore · 10 months

Text

The Wheeler family, "normalcy", what that means in stranger things, how that possibly explains subtext behind the shifting dynamics of the family- particularly Ted's favoritism of Holly over Mike and definitely Nancy, and how this all connects to the Wheeler family show of opulence- more specifically, toys. Just a stream of consciousness honestly.

This one is for the rosegate girlies ***crowd boos***

Now, the Wheeler family has been one of the two main families of the show since the very beginning. However, in my opinion, what's been going on with them behind the scenes have been kept pretty subtle. And by subtle, I mean hidden behind so many layers of symbolism its crazy. From objects in the Wheeler home being reminiscent of things that could be found in the Creel attic (the white wedding dress, the wheel chair, the piano) + the grandfather clock chimes to Mike being able to sense the void, it's kind of obvious at least to me that the Wheelers are plot relevant, its just obvious as to what it is about them.

Over all, they are defined as being the "normal" nuclear family. Their opulence is shown consistently in the show, from Mike's basement full of toys and games, to Karen and Nancy having new outfits/hair-dos almost every season, to Holly's new lite brite (and god we will be getting to this one), and to Jonathan pointing out to Nancy that his father doesn't make 6-figures. The funny thing being that the Wheelers aren't even the richest family in the show. We don't know how much the Sinclair's make- however it seems like Lucas' parents can also afford to get him the walkie talkies and toys also. The Harringtons are by far the richest family we know of. But yet, the Wheelers are the ones the most emphasized to have more than enough.

Now, season 4 was the season where the writers, via Dustin and Steve, proclaimed they were going to have to spell it out for us. And spell it out they did (mostly in Henry's monologue). There are several quotes I want to point out that specifically describe what Stranger Thing's message on "conformity" and "normalcy" is. To summarize? It doesn't exist. Normalcy isn't real, it's a set of arbitrary standards used to keep the average person afraid of being different.

"Humans are a unique type of pest, multiplying and poisoning our world, all while enforcing a structure of their own- a deeply unnatural structure..." - Henry

(cont.) "Where others saw order, I saw a straightjacket- an oppressive, cruel world dictated by made-up rules. Minutes, days, months, years, decades, every life faded, lesser copy of the one before. Wake up- work- eat- sleep-reproduce- die-" - Henry

(cont.) "Everyone is just waiting- waiting for it to all be over, distracting themselves while performing in a silly, terrible play, day after day... I couldn't pretend." - Henry

(Henry describing his parents) "I saw my parents as they truly were. To the world they presented themselves as normal people, good people. But like everything else in this world, it was all a lie- a terrible lie. They had done things- such awful things-"

"I thought I wanted to be like you. Popular. Normal. But it turns out, normal’s just a raging psychopath." - Lucas at Jason

"A lie designed to conceal the truth"- Jason, shot focusing on the Wheelers for a moment

So what does this mean when the Wheelers are considered to be the façade of an average "normal" main family of the show? We see Mike, Nancy, and Karen struggle with conformity and their unhappiness with their "place" in life, but how does this connect to the overall plot? Why are the Wheelers subtlety connected to the supernatural? What is going on "behind the curtain" and what truth is this "lie" concealing?

Well, we already see from Mike, Nancy, and Karen's POV, so lets talk about Ted's relationship with his children aka why I believe the answer can be partially found there.

Honestly you could ask anyone and they would probably give you a different interpretation of this. And to be honest I think they're all very wrong [*boos and hisses from the crowd*].

What I personally think is that Ted lets his children go when they stop "performing" in the lie, the "silly, terrible play" that is the Wheeler family. And that happens to be when they get older, when they start to become individuals (and children should). We see Ted's relationship with this children get worse and worse the older they are. He seems to dote on Holly, at least speaks to Mike, and just completely ignores Nancy's existence.

Hopper has a quote about this that perfectly explains it:

"I think it must be hardwired into us to reject our fathers. So we can grow and move on. Become something of our own."

This quote happens after Enzo talks about his son "Mikhail" (which is literally just "Michael" in Russian kill me the curtains are so fucking blue guys).

Hopper: I bet Mikhail (Michael) will be proud of his pops, at least. Enzo: Mikhail (Michael)? Mmm. No. I can't do nothing right with him anymore, it seems.

The writers of Stranger Things intentionally associated growing up, becoming your own person, with rejecting your father. As in, at some point you just don't need them anymore. Don't need them to support you financially, to protect you. Two things that are seen as the fathers traditional responsibilities: to be the breadwinner and to be the protector of the household. Thanks for spelling it out for us, Duffers.

An intentional parallel also related to fatherhood in the show is letting your children go when they eventually begin to reject you. In the first Wheeler dinner scene in S1, Ted tells Karen to "let [Mike] go" when he storms away from the dinner table, distraught by Will's disappearance. In S4 we see Karen hug Mike, joking promising not even to let him go to college, not letting him go. In the same s1 dinner scene, in contrast with Mike, whom Ted at least attempts to talk calmly to, Ted repeatedly shuts down Nancy ("Language!"). He's already "let her go" by S1, refusing to even listen to her. Ted pushes his children away the moment he feels that they are beginning to "reject" him, and this is symbolized by their toys (which in my opinion is a symbol of Ted attempted to "buy" his children's love and we see that with Holly) and I will get to that in a second.

However, that phase was used similarly in the context of Brenner and Henry. El telling Brenner that he "could not let [Henry] go".

El at "Papa": So many dead. And all because of you. Because you could not stop. You could not let him go.

However as we're shown, both letting your kids go prematurely (Ted) or holding onto them too tightly in a controlling sense (Brenner) both are damaging to your children.

Let's start looking at some photos:

When I talk about Ted's relationship with his children it's subtly portrayed in the Wheeler family photos we get. Notice how Ted stands in between Karen and Mike, Nancy out to the side- not within his arms. Ted holds Nancy at arms length, Mike has not yet been given the full cold shoulder by Ted. This looks to have been taken around S1. And what looks like roses on Nancy's shirt.

They do a similar thing with the Creels, where we see Victor, Virginia, and Alice as a Unit, with Victors arms around Alice and Virginia- Henry is only held by Virginia's hand. Visual storytelling and all that. Henry is being held at arms length in his family, he is the "odd one out". You can even tell by the colors, Henry is the only one not in blue.

Then we see a completely different arrangement here. Now they are in a line. Ted has his arm around Karen (who is holding Holly), while Nancy and Mike are out the furthest away from him, Nancy being the farthest- as usual. Mike is also no longer within Ted's arm length. Notice Holly has one solitary red flower on her dress? Nancy no longer has roses on her shirt? This photo seems to either be taken before or after S2 (I'm not sure? Lol)

As we can see, by S1, Nancy has already been iced out and Mike is on his way by S2. This has a negative effect on the Wheeler siblings, as we see that they struggle with understanding close relationships, especially romantic relationships. Insecure attachments can become transgenerational, as a parent perpetuates it on their child in the same way it was perpetuated onto them:

Just like any other form of trauma or distress, an insecure attachment style can be passed down through generations.

Consequently, as children typically learn by example, a child picks up on this detachment from emotions and mirrors how their caregiver deals with unpleasant feelings ...

We see hints of this in Mike, who expressed his insecurity in his relationship with El:

Mike: Yeah, I know. I… I know she is. But… But what if after all this is over, she- sh- she doesn't need me anymore? Will: No, o- of course she'll still need you. She'll always need you, Mike. Mike: I keep telling myself that, but I… I don't believe it. I mean, she's special. She was born special. Maybe I was one of the first people to realize that. But the truth is, when I stumbled on her in the woods, she just needed someone. It's not fate. It's… It's not destiny. It's just simple dumb luck. And one day she's gonna realize I'm just some random nerd that got lucky that Superman landed on his doorstep. I mean, at least Lois Lane is an ace reporter for the Daily Planet, right? But…

We also see how Ted treats Karen mirrored in their children also.

We see Karen feel neglected by Ted in S2 and her restlessness/unhappiness leading her to fantasize via middle aged woman erotica. However, she is convinced not to cheat when she sees Ted cuddling with Holly on his la z boy. The song of choice of these scene, (I Just) Died In Your Arms, is very telling because its clearly from Karen's perspective about Ted. A few lyrics of note:

I keep lookin' for somethin' I can't get Broken hearts lie all around me And I don't see an easy way to get out of this Her diary, it sits by the bedside table The curtains are closed, the cats in the cradle Who would've thought that a boy like me could come to this Is there any just cause for feelin' like this? On the surface, I'm a name on a list I try to be discreet, but then blow it again I've lost and found, it's my final mistake She's loving by proxy, no give and all take 'Cause I've been thrilled to fantasy one too many times

While the song itself is about a one night stand with an ex, fundamentally its about someone who feels used by a partner but can't stop going back to them. Karen feels like "just a name on a list" and that her experience with Ted is "no give and all take" and love by "proxy" (ie not being loved by someone as they really are, but as who they pretend to be). Which, as we will get into, is a reoccurring thing with Ted and not just Karen but Nancy, Mike, and Holly too. Being used and then pushed out- like as I explained before is portrayed with Mike and Nancy, not only directly, but indirectly with their struggles with romantic relationships- ie not really knowing what love is or just generally not being very good romantic partners.

Now lets talk about Holly because this is fascinating to me at least. I see people say that Ted dotes on Holly, which is true in s3 & s4, but in s1 & s2 we hardly ever see him interact with her. In fact, Holly, in proximity, is more often associated with/near Karen than ever Ted in the first two season. At the dinner/breakfast table the arrangement is usually Ted -> Karen -> Holly. I don't think Ted pays any mind to Holly in the first two seasons in all honesty, unless I'm missing something.

However in s3 something shifts. Whereas before it was Karen and Holly, now its Karen, Holly, and Ted as the new family unit (to the exclusion of Mike and Nancy- who are being pushed out).

Holly is now associated with Ted. We see her cuddling with him on his lay z boy, they all go together at to the fair and Ted adjusts her shirt on the ferris wheel (and at some point Ted hands her the blue teddy bear), and in s4 Holly is constantly playing with her new lite brite in the wheeler den (which is the area of the home most associated with Ted) in pink/white. And as I mentioned before, in the second Wheeler family photo she has one solitary red flower on her dress.

And now we get a new seating arrangement in the church scene, Ted now in between Holly and Karen, again this new unit but with Ted in the middle now ("a lie designed to conceal the truth").

But what about toys? Well, as I mentioned before, its all about the Wheeler's show of opulence, which is directly associated with Ted- as Jonathan points out to Nancy, his father doesn't make 6 figures. When Ted begins to dote on Holly we see immediately in the next season she's got a new toy that she's constantly with. I mean constantly. Building her white rabbit, which in the theme surrounding predator and prey in ST, is a prey animal. Which makes it so much more interesting that the lite brite is used to connect to the UD, the representation of the "shadows" aka someone's fears/guilt/secrets/etc that they refuse to acknowledge. At least to me the toys in the Wheeler home that keep on getting brought up have thematic significance.

Compared to Nancy in the end of S4, who donates her rabbit toy, mentioning that she doesn't need it anymore. In fact all throughout S4 we have moments where Nancy mentioned having grown out of things: when they visit her room frozen in time in the UD and also when she mentions her room poster after Robin brings attention to it.

We also see Holly in pink-white color scheme, a color scheme that Nancy was often associated with in S1 & S2:

Stole these images from @/boysdontcryboycry. you know. like a thief

(also notice her ballerina necklace early on? It's all a "performance".)

Also comparing this to Mikes basement, which is filled to the brim with toys and games. Mike is absolutely spoiled in this aspect from his very introduction in S1E1. And again, the Wheelers are not the richest family in ST, but yet its their status of having more than enough that we see over and over again. Where is Lucas' basement full of toys? It's not like his family seems to be short on money either. But with the Wheelers it's the classic contrast between riches and lack of intimacy, usually signified by the misconception that love can be bought with gifts rather than genuine emotional intimacy. And as we see when the Wheeler children grow up and start requiring that emotional intimacy rather than just being satisfied with toys, like say a child Holly's age, they are pushed out and forced to "grow up" too quickly (as symbolized by Mike being pressured to donate his toys).

When Ted calls Mike's toys "husks of junk" (or something to that effect I don't remember the exact quote), its not just him being rude, its subtextual. Ted is devaluing the affection he gave Mike previously when Mike got those toys to begin with, just as 6 year old Holly got her lite brite when Ted began to dote on her sometime between S2 and S3. Except now Mike is older, and according to Hopper, every child is destined to "reject" their father as they grow, so now those toys are meaningless to Ted who's gearing up to "let him go"- but Mike doesn't want to let go of them. He is only twelve, not yet ready to grow up.

Regardless, this is all to say that Ted prematurely lets go of his children when they start to develop as individuals, not just stuck in a state of being children who are only satisfied with receiving toys. He refuses to engage with his children in an emotional level as they grow, letting them go when they stop being cute, quiet, and easy to extract emotional validation and comfort from. And there is where we see an underlying emotional immaturity to Ted's behavior. While other fathers in the show (like Hopper and Enzo) express their feelings about their children growing up, they are still able to acknowledge that its normal, that they had done the same when they were young. Hopper himself behaved... unpleasantly when El had Mike over constantly in S3 but understands El is growing up and he was just too afraid to lose her. Ted however, seems insistent on rejecting his children before they can reject him- which reveals an inability to handle rejection/abandonment or a sensitivity to it. He would rather hold his own children at arms length and just move onto the next child.

The second part of this post would be to explain why he is like this, and that would require going back all the way to the quotes from earlier in this post. Particularly what The Duffers' mouthpiece Henry's monologue has to say about conformity being a distraction.

"Where others saw order, I saw a straightjacket- an oppressive, cruel world dictated by made-up rules. Minutes, days, months, years, decades, every life faded, lesser copy of the one before. Wake up- work- eat- sleep-reproduce- die- Everyone is just waiting- waiting for it to all be over, distracting themselves while performing in a silly, terrible play, day after day... I couldn't pretend."

Literally what have we seen Ted do throughout the show that isn't waking up, working, eating, sleeping, and reproducing. Its intentional. And these actions are not characterized as things that are healthy, but as distractions. Playing pretend. Distractions one takes while performing in a "silly, terrible play" i.e. the Wheeler family.

The thing is though, the play gets disrupted when Mike and Nancy act out. When they don't play their part, which is only natural as they grow up and become individuals. Then this "silly, terrible play" becomes Karen, Holly, and Ted- that is, up until Holly grows up. The Wheeler family is a "lie designed to conceal a truth" because it isn't a family born out of commitment and love (Nancy saying she doesn't believe her parents ever loved each other), but out of the need for a distraction- for Ted specifically. Which is why while we don't get his POV, we see the horrible effects it has on the rest of the family. Karen's disillusionment and unhappiness with her place in life (getting married young to an older man) and Mike and Nancy being unable to discern what love and commitment actually looks like. They've lived their whole lives in something entirely fake built to serve someone else's need for normalcy, which is partially why we see Nancy end up in an unhappy loveless relationship with Steve, or why Mike struggles in a ""normal"" relationship with El afraid that she won't need him anymore.

Its all neatly symbolized in this one shot from the end of S4:

One source of distraction paired with another- Ted's TV and the Wheeler family photo right under it, the earliest one where Nancy is still prim and proper, Mike is smiling widely, and Karen is still a brunette. With Karen and Holly right there next to it.

(and then Ted turns off the TV. Bad or good omen? You decide :D)

But the "truth" can be found with Holly. The red flower that can be seen on Holly's dress in the second Wheeler family photo and the white-pink color scheme she is in for the majority of S4 is associated with other characters.

The red flower (rose) in particular is repeatedly associated with mothers, for example Billy's mom who also had one clearly stamped onto the front of her shirt.

Or just in general roses all over the Creel home, including the glass door, Karen at many points, all the fake urns all over the Wheeler home, the real urn (which has pink flowers on it and straight up changes during the earthquake dont ask why oooh its just a production error), the Byers wallpaper- particularly the one Will was stuck behind, etc etc man just check out my rosegate masterpost.

The pink and white (and sometimes blue) color scheme also being often seen not only with Nancy but also with other characters, particularly mothers but not limited to that. Karen being one, Mrs. Cunningham, Tammy Thompson (described as a muppet), Virginia, El, and most importantly to me "Rose Weaver" Robin (whos hairstyle is literally just a mix of Karen's S2/S3 bangs and Virginias bob).

Holly... Holly is the last "distraction" left. And she'd dressed like Rosemary for a good portion of s4 and she's also the only blonde Wheeler sibling. Just a symbolistic representation of creating a family and using your kids to soothe and distract yourself. Holly is dressed like Rosemary because Ted seeks the emotional validation he never received (to what extent? We do not know) from this "silly, little play", in which now Holly is the only sibling left because Nancy and Mike have been "pushed out" due to well... being individuals that don't solely exist to provide a "distraction" and Ted's seeming sensitivity to his kids growing up and rejecting him (because Rosemary totally didn't reject him right? right? That can't be what this is all about lol. lmao even.)

And to see that Holly's lite brite was used as the connection between the RSU and the UD- the "light"/the good and the darkness that people don't want to acknowledge about themselves.

On the bright side (pun intended) I'm pretty sure this means that they are Ted's "light". However still fucked up. 1000 years in therapy for you. Your family arent solely just your "light" they are real human beings.

Anyways the lesson here is that people who shouldn't have kids shouldn't be expected to conform and forced to start a family lmao.

TDLR:

Wheeler s5 sweep

#brother I am still holding onto that wheeler happy ending white knuckles n all #rosegate #anyways this is my nuclear ted take. take it or leave it. rosegate be upon ye! Delusion be upon ye!

43 notes · View notes

bugsbenefit · 5 months

Text

probably the last post about the play for tonight before i go lay down but lets do it one more time gamers. spoilers ahead. but not really that lore heavy this time. just casual thoughts now

i have no idea how this plays out because it seems to be a side plot and not really relevant but all these parents competing for president is somehow extremely funny to me

especially with this being one of the first spoilers i saw. 0 context and just these guys competing. good for them i guess, i hope they had fun

also Ted🤝Steve is simultaneously both something i would have said makes sense for his characterization as the "suburban dad" stereotype but also still something that makes me laugh because it feels so ridiculous

and finishing with a thought that IS more plot/story related. i'm still not sure how on board i am with them giving Henry the powers later on and having there actually be something wrong with him (some form of possession/influencing taking place). they can work with it for s5 and it's fine. but i do think they could have had a stronger story had they gone for a more "something inherently different" direction. because that's the theme they're also using for all the kid characters, be it queerness, blackness, disabilities, or powers when it comes to El. breaking that pattern and having there actually be something tangible "wrong" with Henry is a missed opportunity to me, especially when he's seemingly paralleling the main kids so much

#tfs spoilers

4 notes · View notes

maddiwacker · 1 year

Text

Social Media and Participatory Culture

What is Participatory culture?

Henry Jenkins describes Participatory culture as the "creation of media" and different forms of media that can be a part of this creation. Jenkins gets into how we are not as immersed in this culture as we should be, we should be more exposed to the different types of media. His Ted Talk touched on students in schools and how different media will help them be more successful and help them participate more in the community. Participatory culture basically allows people to participate and share information in their community through the media.

In the reading "Confronting the challenges of Participatory Culture: Media education for the 21st century" I learned a lot about the importance of media in schools and the community. In the reading it said "A participatory culture is also one in which member believe their contributions matter and feel some degree of social connection with one another" (Jenkins, Puroshotma, Clinton, Weigel, & Robison, 2009). This type of culture allows us to feel connected with one another and share information and become more education on things we did not know before. Participatory culture opens a door of connections and relationships.

This reading also said that, "Schools and afterschool programs must devote more attention to fostering what we call the new media literacies: a set of cultural competencies and social skills that young people need in the new media landscape" (Jenkins, Puroshotma, Clinton, Weigel, & Robison, 2009). Social media is always changing and I agree that it is important to teach kids young about the main skills that they will need to have when working with digital media.

My own participation in digital media is mostly over the big social media platforms. The social media platforms that I use the most are snapchat, Instagram, and VSCO. These platforms allow me to post things that go on in my everyday life. On instagram I mostly just comment and like other peoples post and often times it is people that I talk to everyday, people do this to show support on their post. I post more about my social life with friends and family. I think the main thing that motivates me to be active online is just relevance. I think it is important to show people the big events that are happening in your life and my main reason why I stay on social media is to be relevant.

0 notes

ericleo108 · 3 years

Text

Blog Navigation 2021

List #3

“Let go of the past and go for the future.” - Henry David Thoreau

Blog Navigation List: 2020, 2019

Last Updated 05/04/21

Media and Treatise List:

Philosophy:

🌍108 The Story Of Discovering Earth’s Consciousness (post) - I am now an author and this is my first book. The book is nonfiction and autobiographical and about celestial consciousness, my personal story of struggling with schizoaffective disorder, atmospheric consciousness, sustainability, and eugenics, and finishes with what the number 108 means for the origins of life on Earth.

💿🌍Read “108” (album) - As I am a hip-hop artist, I also wrote an album to compliment, popularize, and promote my book “108” as a tool. It’s much quicker to understand what “108” is about by listening to the “Read 108” track. The album stands alone and is more focused on saying some in hip-hop, being relevant, and keeping with the Emma Watson romantic narrative.

🚸🚜 Knhoeing 2020 - The information is broken down into celestial consciousness, atmospheric consciousness, sustainability, and eugenics. Knhoeing states the planets, stars, and atmosphere are alive, and how humans can understand that through sustainability and eugenics. Knhoeing has to do with understanding your position in the universe and expresses and addresses human purpose through a eugenics goal. In order to survive & thrive as a species, we must support ourselves through healthy sustainability and breed to understand higher dimensions.

🙏Sentientism 2021 - This post contains insights into my mind and the voice in my head, Gaia. I explain how sentientism is the religion of Gaia where you worship through action and create dogma through science and philosophy. If the planet earth is conscious how would she try to communicate considering she has no mouth or ligaments? How would Gaia try to communicate? I postulate and explain how Gaia could be communicating through a kind of telepathic randonauting.

📐 Expanding on Plato’s Philosophy: Forms and the Tripartite Soul (2020) - In this treatise, I explain how Plato’s forms are stored and strived for by Gaia and how Plato’s theory about the tripartite soul is similar to my theory about the will.

♟️ Logic - This post is a short introduction to logic. I use quotes and pictures of pages from the book “How Philosophy Works.” The content includes deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning, fallacies, and formal logic. I have also embedded a couple CrashCourse videos.

Sociology:

🏳️‍🌈 Gender Equality 2021 - In this essay, I break down gender equality into six categories: LGBTQ, Phobic, Sexual, Mental, Feminist, and Economic. To properly show the subject of gender equality I reference the 6 Netflix documentaries and linked and discuss related videos from Ellen, HeForShe, TED, Jordan Peterson, The World Bank, and the UN.

🏁 Dark Racism 2021 - In this treatise I explain the science of racism, how it’s an arbitrary distinction that is socially constructed. Black people do have it worse due to institutionalized racism and white privilege. However, I talk about how black people create their own in-group morality around the word “nigga,” and my presented solution.

🌎👣 Earth: Sustainability, How To Save Our Planet - If you want to know how to save our planet this post is the summation. Taking from the featured WWF video, I focus on a carbon tax and the three ways to save the planet. Along the way I discuss how it relates to The Psycho Consumption Cage.

🍱 The Psycho Consumption Cage 2021 - In this treatise I talk about how it’s hard to see environmental degradation that is not added in our economics, how you should be using your buying power strategically, how apex species need economic and congressional representation, some solutions, and examples of psycho tendencies from Christmas and hip-hop.

🌲Marijuana Treatise 2021 - Published on April 20th and introduced with a discussion of my personal use, in this essay, I wrote about the versatility of hemp, the immorality and failure of the war on drugs, and the medical benefits of cannabis.

Politics:

🍊Trump’s Effect on America - In this post I explore how Trump made the country more xenophobic, racist, and ignorant. I use some psychological terms like cognitive dissonance or the Dunning-Krueger effect.

🐘🔫Republicans are Dangerous - In this post I focus on a chart that shows the most acts of terror come from conservative extremists.

🍊🦠Trump’s Covid Response - In this post I show how Trump is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths due to his response to covid.

Personal:

👨‍💻 My Reckoning - This post is part two from my book “108: The Story of Earth’s Consciousness.” Part one explains the first part of Knhoeing, celestial consciousness. Part two is my personal story from the time I graduated from college in 2010 until 2019 and explains why I think there is celestial consciousness. Knhoeing 2020 is a necessary prerequisite to understanding this story.

✨💕Cosmic Love 2021 - In this post I explain how Selena Gomez is reflecting me and why she is my cosmic love. Coming in phases, I reference Emma Watson who also reflects me and I talk about in my book “108” and in (the previous year’s) Emma Watson Cosmic Love post.

🍷The Chalice Mixtape - This is a mixtape I did from jacked industry beats back in 2017. It was a response to the cosmic love I’d been seeing and I talk about in the blog and “108” book. I love Emma Watson and I want her to think about me so I came up with a fantasy and rapped about it. I took Emma Watson and Taylor Swift’s middle name, Charlotte and Alyson (who I changed to Alice), and made songs talking to them with the subject of gender equality and the theme of Charlotte's Web and Alice In Wonderland.

Journal list:

Journal 01/27/21: Looking Forward - In this journal, I talk about having a healthy relationship with food, Ancient Aliens and Bob Lazar, Marcus Lemonis, David Dobrick, being in remission, keto business plans, and looking forward to Joe Biden improving social security.

Journal 12/04/20: Refocused - This is my first journal in 6 months and does not contain a video. I talk about my plans and the pandemic, my book and music, growing my hair, stagnant weight loss, looking for housing, the importance of food, and going into business.

Video Journal 06/01/20 - Moving On - In this journal I talk about how I have plans to move to Lansing and attend graduate school at MSU. Along the way, I talk about the “108” book promotion and how the diet is coming along. I update the reader on topics from my previous VJ.

Video Journal 02/13/20 - Published 108 - In this journal I talk about publishing my book “108,” getting work-out equipment, exercising, losing weight on a ketogenic diet, how I want stem cell therapy for my knee, affording things on disability, my credit score, who I plan on voting for, that congress should have term limits and future career plans.

#blogger #history #science #racism #gender #equality #inequality #logic

40 notes · View notes

raselafsaofia · 3 years

Text

I was suddenly jolted to consciousness out of my sleep this morning with these ideas screaming at me from the foreground of my conscious mind. The ideas that I have been looking at and considering suddenly were aligning to a single thought.

It began with the memory of what Dane Mitchell said to me last year. He said that there are three cultures present in the work. "The Pakeha world, the Maori culture, and my Samoan culture". I was thrown by his comment, whilst it was true I had not thought of, nor acknowledge this as least not in the way he pointed them out. This threeness threw the equation to an uncomfortable place.

I woke up with a sudden realisation that whilst I have not yet made anything I have been unconsciously trying to resolve this issue of three. This subconscious conversation that has been going on beneath the surface of my awareness were so loud and clear in my head this morning as I was waking up that it jolted me. I was troubled by this abrupt alignment of thought as I needed to fix this. This trouble or problem of three. Two I am fine with. Three is harder.

I was listening to Caroline McHugh's Ted talk yesterday on 'The Art of Being yourself' where she introduces two ideas which intrigued me. She talked about 'Interiority'. Interiority is her madeup word, she talked about the human ego living in two modes either inferiority, or superiority. She introduced interiority as a middle ground where one's ego can live in as a preferred alternative as superiority and inferiority two opposite ends of the scale are negative and toxic. This introduction of this seemingly third space took me back to Homi Bharbas introduction of the 'third space' or the hybryd space' in his book The Location of Culture.

The second thing Caroline McHugh said that caught my attention was when she said she was a 'womanist' not a feminist. I love this, though I don't yet know what this has to do with my work, still I wanted to tug that somewhere in here so I don't forget it.

The alignment that came to me this morning was triggered by this talk of Caroline McHughs. This interiority as a probable 'third space'. The existence of three cultures in my work as Dane Mitchell pointed out, and the equation being moved from a binary space to a complex politically charged space was not what I desired. In fact in my interview for my BFA entry where Noel Ivanoff was present I particularly pointed out that one place I did not want my work to exist was in the 'political' setting as far as Art goes.

However as these thought were firing up the aligning of these ideas, a statement Henry Symond made a few years ago now in one of his lectures came back to me. In his introduction statement he said 'everything is political from the things we buy to the food we eat'. This brought a sudden connection of my process to politics and it bugged me. I hate politics.

This 'hate of politics' alarmed me as I was waking up. This uncomfortable disturbing feeling in the pit of my stomach forced me to look at the idea of a binary equation. I like the nature of a binary resolution. The two opinions, the negative and positive, the left and right, the up or down. The introduction of a third voice, a third space, though it may be a comfortable solution to the tension that two opposing ideas can cause. I find it easier to work in this tension and creating my own third space hence the title of my show in 2020 're-tension', a three culture tension is not so easy to resolve.

The point of all this, was this. I woke up with this clear determination to push my thoughts and ideas and my making process past these binaries. And back to a place of origin. This is in a way, a form of displacing the third space as there is three cultures to consider. However in the politics of nations a nation is globally represented by its government. Its government speak as a singular voice of representation, this could be considered as a form of resolving the duality if this nations identity. Whilst this throws up alot of issues it is an option that is presented if I consider why and how I came to be in country in terms of its political history as a nation in the world among other nations.

Going back to this place of origin or birth place of emerging is where I want to speak from. I love Homi Bharbas third space. This new place that is created and was born out of colonial times. He himself was having to enter a place where binary definitions did not fit or give acknowlegdement to the real impact of colonialism or the plight of immigrants (as he had move to London to study). As they; foreigners enter a culture outside of their own. A place where the displacements forces readaptations of traditions thus creating new forms of identity born out of the need to survive and thrive in a new home of arrival.

These ideas caused me to think about the Treaty of Waitangi. The treaty is to me a binary document. It creates and declares NZ to be a nation made up of 2 nations, everyone else who comes into NZ remains a secondary foreigner the Crown being the primary of course.

This triggered this thoughts that for the past few months I have been trying to resolve. This idea of being home yet a forever a foreigner. Everywhere I go in this land, I am constantly reminded of this status, of being a foreigner. This 'fireigner' identity. This 'home but not my land' place where I find myself in, also led to the need to resolve another politically created narrative.

Samoa was ruled by NZ. In 1962 Samoa was granted its independence, whilst NZ was in Samoa its colonial rule of Samoa gave way to the Mau movement, which was using passive resistance to oppose colonial rule and occupation of Samoa by NZ forces. And it led to the death and killing of one of Samoas prominent chiefs.

The day of his death in history is known as

Black Saturday, one NZ policemen and 11 Samoans were killed.

The NZ government after Samoa was granted its independence a 'Treaty of

Friendship' was signed between Samoa and NZ whereby Samoa was granted a quota where Samoans can immigrate to live and work permanently in NZ.

This treaty or agreement is the gate I entered NZ through.

This coming into a place where tension already exists and through a agreement that is politically manufactured where, I legally have a place yet in a national level am not really welcomed. This tension is what I woke up this morning, aware that I was trying resolve it. I wanted to push my ideas either forward to a contemporary space where the narrative it creates is in a manufactured or industrialised zone. To speak into the now of my existence in the land or to go back.

The going back to a place of origin. This idea that everything came from somewhere else. In the Christian understanding, humans originated from God. The human spirit existed with God before it embodied human flesh. This thought and idea of 'things having come from somewhere else, and that things had a life before' was so prominent in my thoughts this morning so much so that before I opened my eyes I was already fully charged.

While taking physics in high school. I was told that matter cannot be destroyed. It can only be changed in terms of its state. E.g wood when burnt turns to ashes, but ashes is a different atomic structure from wood, as well as in all decomposition when things die they turn back to soil therefore everything techniqually still exist but only in an altered state.

This chain of thought happened in my sleep. It was like I had been plugged into something whilst sleeping and I woke up with my brain completely conscious of the place I wanted to explore. The 'life before' the history of pre-existence' of an object or materials. I want to take a step back and look at the materials I use and consider what life they lived before this. This pre-encounter existence was so exciting that I sat up and started writing.

This jumbled up mass of entangled thoughts is so exciting yet so huge, so complex that it brought me back to my usual place of beginnings. 'The ideas are again too big, too conceptual, too in the air with no place to land let alone begin' zone.

One thing I can say though, this was such an exciting chain of thought that I am all fired up to go. This led to, what I now need to resolve, which is 'where am I going and what am I making?' What does all of this mean and with regards to what I am going to make? Where to from here?

Of course now I need to stop. Pause, take one simple part and begin with that. As the vast ocean that these ideas represent is too vague unattainable and are 'pie in the sky' unless I can connect them to the work. Which means already I need to edit, strip back somethings and simplify. But before I get to that.

There is one thing I know I need to look at and its this. The idea of a third voice, the voice of the foreigner, what is that? How does that look or what does it sound like? This is just a side thought.

I had mentioned Caroline McHugh's 'womanist' comment. I like this idea. The idea of the voice of a woman, not a female but a woman. The identity of a woman, as an art maker, a nurturer of families, of identities whilst she herself is an identity. This role or existence is charged with a different set of metaphors. The Maya Angelous 'Phenominally Phenominal Woman' and exploration of a woman as concept perhaps and her place in the work. And

taking this back to a relevant place in regards to where I am, or where I was placed after the 2020 show. The end of year show, connects to this chain of thoughts as it brings me back to the very basic yet profound place of 'woman's work'. The handmade craft, and the gendered allocation of such a practice. This handicraft, instead of handcrafted, and the unspoken yet present disrespect directed at this way of making is a tension I would really like to delve into this year.

I want to look at perhaps exploring the value systems of materials, and making processes. The handmade which is the handicraft versus the artisans, the handmade versus the handicraft, the manufactured versus the natural, the organic versus the raw, the found and the grown. Whilst these are presented as tensions and binaries at the moment, they are put only in this way to highlight and as a form of note-to-self to remind myself of the ideas I need to remember and keep in the forefront of my consideration once I start making.

A final thought. My interest at this point is purely not so much to consider an identity of sorts with regards to my place and role as a foreigner, my only desire is to find a way of discussing and voicing my ideas that are purely my own, informed by my place of origin and speaking into/from my now space of existence. I want to come to a place where a singular material or two can be utilised to speak as a representation of a single voice, my own.

1 note · View note

10906900-blog · 5 years

Text

Annotated Bibliography final

Annotated Bibliography

“Analysis of Financial Literacy in a College Population.” Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, vol. 19, no. 4, Feb. 2019, doi:10.33423/jhetp.v19i4.2197.

“Analysis of Financial literacy in a College Population” is a research paper made in 2019 by the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. It researches how many college students are financially literate today. They describe how important financial literacy is and how it helps young people throughout their lives. For the research they take into mind what gender the person is, how motivated they are, what major they’re in, their age, and their financial backround.

They’ve come up with a few hypothesis, which are:

1. Business students will be more financially literate than those who are not business students.

2. Students who have taken financial literacy courses will be more financially literate than those who have not.

3. Students who have family members in a financial field will score higher on the financial literacy test than those who do not.

4. Students who are more confident will score higher on the financial literacy test than those who are not.

5. Students who are more motivated will score higher on the financial literacy test than those who are not.

It’s interesting what this research shows, and I hope it motivates college students to take a course that would help with this. This analysis was interesting and gave me some more insight into the points I was going to make in my essays. I had a more board view of finances, but this is exact research for a particular population. especially having this research be towards people my age was interesting. It also goes into what financial literacy is and how people may view it nowadays.

Bednar, Joseph, and BusinessWest Staff. “Financial Literacy Should - but Often Doesn't - Start Young.” BusinessWest, 21 May 2019, https://businesswest.com/blog/financial-literacy-should-but-often-doesnt-start-young/.

The title of this particular article is “Financial Literacy should – but often doesn’t- start young” by Joseph Bednar. This article was made in May 2019 and goes into what mistakes people make and solutions we can do to solve those issues. The article goes over mistakes that people make and how to avoid those bad decisions. The blogger makes a stance on how schools should be teaching financial literacy at a younger age. It is so important to start teaching kids this as young as we can. It may not be “entertaining” for some children to talk about how money works, but teachers and parents should do the best they can. I was never really taught about to handle real life situations with finance in school, until I got to college.

There are companies wanting this education of financial literacy to be spread throughout children of the US. In the article there are quotes from Credit Unions that want its customer to be financially literate. This also focuses on the importance of teens being educated in finances. Surveys are done that show that some teens may have a lack of confidence about their financial future. This helps support the claim that financial literacy is so important. This article is a great for our society to be able to get financial literacy to be taught at a younger stage in life. Another reason why this is important because the only education people have in the youth for finances is from their parents.

Hill, Napolean. Think and Grow Rich. 1937.

This is a book has a very interesting back story, which actually helps magnify the content in the book. This book was made in 1937 and it is a self-improvement book. Napolean Hill interviewed and studied the most successful men during his time. Men such as Thomas Edison, Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, and many more. The book starts with an introduction explaining the 13 steps of becoming your best self. These steps can be applied to anything, especially financial literacy.

Some of the steps in the book are desire, imagination, organized planning, persistence, and the subconscious mind. Each step is important for different reasons and the author goes into depth with each principle. This book definitely goes into a spiritual aspect, but also how these aspects can help with self-improvement and becoming successful. And again these steps or principles are things that Mr. Hill found in hundreds of the most successful men of his time. He lists some names in the book, but says that it all started with an invitation by Andrew Carnegie. This book contains the “secret” successful people knew and Mr. Carnegie invited Mr. Hill to do twenty years of research to compile the secret from these people, and share it with the world.

The author is very confident when he says this book contains the secret to success. Thousands of people have practiced what’s in this novel. The secret was used by President Wilson during the World War, and told Mr. Hill that “it was strong factor in raising the funds for the war”.

Kiyosaki, Robert, and Sharon L. Lechter. Rich Dad, Poor Dad. TechPress, 1997.

“Rich dad poor dad” is a book written by Robert Kiyosaki who is a multi-millionaire. This book was published in 1997 and it helps people know how to be financially successful. The author tells the story of his dad (poor dad) and his friends’ dad (rich dad) and how both of these men influenced his life. The poor dad is educated but lacks “street smart”; and the rich dad has very little education but has lots of “street smart”. The principles of these men are taught throughout the novel, along with insights from the author Robert Kiyosaki. The principles are great and help people think outside the box.

Principles in the novel, “Rich dad Poor dad”, are as follows:

Roberts describes a phrase he calls don’t work for money, have money work for you. He explains that too many work to hard and don’t think outside the box. He encourages readers to become owners of their business and that they can get income without them doing a lot of work. Another principle is the importance of financial literacy. He basically explains how important it is to learn accounting, or take a class about it. Another principle is that we should work to learn and don’t work for money. This is similar to the first one, but he goes deeper into the importance of learning. He also describes knowing the difference between assets and liabilities, and how people need to learn this so that they can stay financially stable and not go bankrupt.

Kruse, Nicole. “Money Matters.” Nais.org, June 2019.

This article is by a woman names Nicole Kruse in the summer of 2019. The article also goes into the importance of students becoming prepared for the real world. The real world can be crazy and unexpected, and financial literacy can help with that. The neat thing about this article is that it references other research that has been done for when other countries and states implemented a curriculum to help students be taught finances in school. She has a huge focus on getting these classes into schools, but also suggests it should be taught multiple times. Mostly because the things we learn in one class may not be enough to make it a habit for students. This article is a little small, but still expresses the importance of students being taught how to be financially literate.

I think article is very relevant and mentions things that I have not heard from the other articles. In the beginning it explains where we are today as a country. It mentions tests done to measure financial literacy across the country made from a study called the National Financial Capabiliy Study by FINRA Investor Education Foundation. So it not only goes over the importance of it, but also where we are has a country. They concluded that nearly two-thirds of the people in America are not financially literate. They based this on a financial literacy test. I believe that providing this in schools at a younger age will help America today, but also for the future.

Lally, Tammy. “Let's Get Honest about Our Money Problems.” TED, June 2017, https://www.ted.com/talks/tammy_lally_let_s_get_honest_about_our_money_problems?language=en#t-709049.

The speaker’s name is Tammy Lally and she is a money coach. In this TED talk in 2017, she explains a story about her brother and how from the experience that happened to him inspired her to realize that we should break free of “money shame”. People around the world feel this. When people buy things and use money not really for things we would consciously think of. She brought up a good point saying that just because we make certain decisions with money, does not mean we should beat ourselves and think we are bad with finances. This ted talk goes how money can really get a hold of someone’s life.

This feeling of money shame, can make people feel unworthy of love just based on our bank accounts and what we own. She explains that it doesn’t matter how much money we have, and sometimes people let money control our lives. An example of someone having money shame would be someone living in a house or having a car they don’t really have the budget for. Tammy also encourages that people shouldn’t try to hide their money shame. She also encourages that money should stop being a taboo topic, because not talking about it can lead to bad consequences. Tammy of course encourages to stay out of debt and budget. I love this talk because she really helps realize what I spend and how feel about spending. And I like how she makes the point that money does not equal happiness nor our self worth.

Lance, et al. “Is Money Actually Important and Does Money Matter?” The Mastermind Within, 14 Mar. 2019, https://www.themastermindwithin.com/does-money-really-matter/.

This is article made by a financial blogger, and the author wanted to explore a little bit about money. The title is “Is money actually important and does money matter?”. It goes into a lot of what if situations like if money wasn’t that important in people’s lives. The blogger also talks about how money or finances can sometimes get in the way of important things in life. The blogger further explains that if money didn’t really matter, there would be no stopping people from going to spend time with friends and family or even travelling the world.

I would say this is an important question to ask ourselves if money really matters. Money can cause a lot of stress and break ups in life. Even between friends or spouses, money can sometimes break those relationships. Now selfishness is a big thing when these break ups happen but this isn’t really a psychology essay. Now I also think money can help with achieving goals or making memories with the people you love. The author did mention that if people thought money didn’t matter, there would be no stopping people from going to Las Vegas and doing other things that may have that person loose money. Thinking that money doesn’t matter can be risky, but I think it’s important that we realize people may view money in different ways.

The author then closes with a final remark that at the end of the day, people aren’t thinking about money. When people are on their death bed, they’re not going to be thinking about how much money they have.

Payzan-LeNestour, Elise. “Why We Take Financial Risks.” TED, 2016, https://www.ted.com/talks/elise_payzan_lenestour_why_we_take_financial_risks.

The speaker for this Ted talk is Elise Payzan-LeNestour. This speaker at Ted talks about why humans gamble or take financial risks. She is a behavioral scientist that specializes neuro finance. Although this isn’t really a “how to” get rich resource, I think it’s important to realize the consequences of risky decisions with finances. There’s been a few tests on this. The first test she mentions is a monkey test. The monkey is in a cage and has two buttons both giving it sugar. One button gives a fixed about of sugar each time, one button gives out more sugar but sometimes gives a shock to the monkey. And with other tests she notices that we like taking risks. Even financial ones.

She describes that we are “greedy and lack self-control”. Before making this statement she explains other tests that they’ve done. The tests were to see if people who take risks have a “homer simpson” mind set. Comparing that mindset to “spock”, we learn that it doesn’t matter how intelligent we are, we all are subject to taking financial risks. People just have the temptation to gamble. Elise says people “cannot resist the temptation to seek more reward”. After looking at this, she describes that we are almost “hard-wired to gamble”. We sometimes cannot resist the chance of getting something more, even though it’s not guaranteed.

“Practical Psychology.” YouTube, YouTube, 12 Feb. 2016, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCir93b_ftqInEaDpsWYbo_g/featured.

Practical Pyshcology is youtube channel that started in the last couple years and already has almost 2million subscribers. The creator of this channel has many videos and a lot of them are on self-development, and some of them are involve financial advice about saving money, selling, credit cards, etc. Whenever he does say most of his statements, he does refer to the place where he got them from. Or he just states what he’s learned from his own experience. I will now explain some of his tips for becoming more financially literate.

For saving money he suggested on making a monthly statement (budget), identify needs vs wants, avoiding spending money once you get paid, and don’t take loans to buy things. He also gives other tips like how to invest and how to use a credit card properly. Now a lot of his videos do explain how to set smart goals and have healthier habits, which are necessary to becoming financially literate and successful. He has a lot tips he’s learned from the habits of millionaires, but also tips similar to Dave Ramsey. One for example is that using cash (instead of a card) sends a signal to the brain that you lost something. When people use their credit/debit card, there’s no signal sent to the brain because their card is giving right back to them. But the physical cash isn’t coming back after you use it. So when people spend a lot of money, they’re most likely using a card instead of cash.

Ramsey, Dave. “Dave Ramsey's 7 Baby Steps.” Daveramsey.com, Ramsey Resolutions, 2019, https://www.daveramsey.com/dave-ramsey-7-baby-steps#baby_step_2.

Dave Ramsey is a multi-millionaire and has a podcast for financial advice. He’s written books, has his own company, and gives advice to not only help people get rich, but helps them get out of a financially difficult situation. In the link is his famous 7 baby step plan to become financially successful.

One of the first steps, he suggests people to pay off all debt (excluding home loan). So that means student loans, car loans, and credit cards. He excludes home loans in the beginning because he knows it takes a lot of time to pay off those for most Americans. His steps also include saving, investing, and saving for your children’s college fund. The last step is to build wealth and give. He states that spirituality will help rich people not lose their heads when they gain wealth. That helps him be majorly generous when accrues more wealth than he needs. For most of my sources from him, I will use these 7 steps and podcasts he has. I haven’t read any of his books just yet.

His podcasts mostly consist of him answers questions to his listeners. There are of course people who disagree with his views, but Mr. Ramsey sticks with his views and strategies for becoming financially stable. He gives tips for self-reliance, car payments, mortgage, life insurance, and even identity theft. He’s gone bankrupt before, but obviously knows how to get out of quick which is why his advice is more compelling to me.

We can prevent us from doing this by having one hand tied behind our backs. If we simply restrict ourselves from gambling, there is a way for us to avoid this temptation.

1 note · View note

kahnk039 · 3 years

Text

Social Media & Participatory Culture

Participatory culture theory is the idea that there is a shift in content from just being created for consumers to enjoy, to the consumers actually creating the content themselves and feeling that their involvement matters. Henry Jenkins really touched on this idea and how it relates to social media in his TED Talk, especially using the example of YouTube, when he said, “By merging the technical aspects of youth as media creators with the social aspects of youth as social networkers, new media platforms such as YouTube offer a participatory culture in which to develop, interact, and learn.” (Jenkins, 2010) This platform is a key indicator of participatory culture in that the majority of content posted and consumed on a large scale comes from other “users.” There is no longer a clear line between creators and users, but instead they are intertwined.

My participation on social media reflects this idea in some ways, but I would not say that I myself am very involved in creating content. I have drifted quite a bit from posting to social media over the years, and more just sit back and consume other’s posts. With that, though I would say that the majority of what I consume is user-generated. Twitter, Snapchat and Instagram are the three main social media sites that I use, and the large majority of who I follow on there and what I see would fall under the category of other users, not so much businesses or famous influencers. Tweets, posts of pictures, and sharing of a “story” on snapchat are all examples of user generated media, since they are all users themselves and use the sites to consume other’s posts. This is a prime example of participatory culture, and made me realize it is much more common than I originally believed.

An important idea that was brought up along with participatory culture was how it can be used to bring people together towards a common political goal. The chapter really touched on this, claiming that “Social media appears as an instrumental tool, an implement that can be wielded by activists to enhance their activities.” (Hinton & Hjorth, 2013) I think this is extremely relevant today, as we just concluded an important presidential election that many people felt a close connection to. I saw more people involved in political posts than I ever have, using their voices to encourage others to vote, creating threads of evidence towards controversy, coordinating protests, and more. The record breaking numbers of people who showed up to vote this election, more than many cities and the entire country have ever seen before, is an example of how this user-generated media creates connectedness and involvement that works.

Lastly, I want to mention that participatory culture relates so closely to connected learning, as “Participatory culture is reworking the rules by which school, cultural expression, civic life, and work operate.” (Jenkins, Puroshotma, Clinton, Weigel, & Robison, 2009) This statement about what participatory culture is doing for schools and life in general could be used in hand with the connected learning movement. Both of these ideas focus on encouraging traditional users to not only consume on these platforms, but to use them to create, and let their talents and interests thrive.

0 notes

crowdvscritic · 4 years

Text

round up // SEPTEMBER 20

Do you remember…2020’s month of September? Pop culture was changing the minds of pretenders, and we knew it was here to staaaaaayyyyyy…

Pardon that corny intro, but I assure you it’s relevant to this list. As always this is a round up of the best movies, books, music, TV shows, and whatever-else-you-can-think-of that was new to me in the last calendar month, in roughly the order I experienced them. This month is full of comedies, murder mysteries, several more lists within this list, and, yes, a little bit of Earth, Wind & Fire. What’s not included? An apology for getting that song stuck in your head.

September Crowd-Pleasers

Clear and Present Danger (1994)

If you’re wishing for a Jack Ryan on Amazon Prime fix, this is your best bet until the next season drops. With a cast including Harrison Ford, James Earl Jones, Willem Defoe, Joaquim de Almeida, and Henry Czerny, you know this face-off between Jack Ryan, the U.S. government, and a Colombian drug cartel will be exciting. Crowd: 9/10 // Critic: 8.5/10

Palm Springs (2020)

This Sundance hit (now streaming on Hulu) si at its best when it’s sentimental, goofy, and introspective, a rare combo that makes it a mostly* fresh take on the rom-com. You can read my review (including that asterisk*) at ZekeFilm. Crowd 9/10 // Critic: 8/10

Double Feature — Girl Power Action: G.I. Jane (1997) + Mulan (2020)

In both of these stories, a woman is the first to join the man’s world of the military. In G.I. Jane (Crowd: 8.5 // Critic: 7/10), that’s Demi Moore going through training for the Navy SEALs, and in Mulan (Crowd: 8.5/10 // Critic: 7/10), it’s Yifei Liu disguising herself as a man to save her father’s life in ancient China. Not everything has aged perfectly about G.I. Jane (and there’s reasonable controversy around the production of Mulan), but for a dose of girl boss energy, this duo will do the trick. You can read my full review of Mulan at ZekeFilm.

Double Feature — Bill & Ted: Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991) + Bill & Ted Face the Music (2020)

Bill S. Preston, Esq. and Ted “Theodore” Logan are gems not to be taken for granted, which is why I have no qualms about them reuniting after a 30-year break. (Of course, I also recommend the original Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure, but I watched it years before this September.) Crowd: 9/10 // Critic: 7.5/10

Double Feature — Mistaken Identity Rom-Coms: Nothing Sacred (1937) + Green Card (1990)

In Nothing Sacred (Crowd: 8/10 // Critic: 8/10), reporter Fredric March thinks small-town girl Carole Lombard is dying—really, she just wants an excuse to see the big city of New York. (Another instance of the journalism plot!) In Green Card (Crowd: 8/10 // Critic: 7/10), Frenchman Gérard Depardieu and American McDowell marry so he can stay in the States and she can get a couples-only apartment with a greenhouse. They have to keep up the ruse for her neighbors and the INS, which is easier said than done since they can’t stand each other. I know that whole “I’m not who you thought I was” trope can get old fast in romantic comedies, and frankly, if you don’t like the genre, these won’t be the ones to convert you. But if you’re like me and love a good rom-com (okay, and let’s be real—I also like quite a few bad ones), these two are worth the watch.

Draft Day (2014)

If only football were this exciting in real life! I checked this out because it was one of Chadwick Boseman’s earliest movie roles, and while it’s a supporting role, he’s no less wonderful. I was more surprised I was sucked into the politics and strategy behind the NFL Draft. Since I can’t express to you how much I don’t care about football in a reasonable word count, I’ll just say Boseman, Kevin Costner, and Jennifer Garner performed a miracle in making a movie other than Remember the Titans that can make me care about the sport at least for a few hours. Crowd: 8.5/10 // Critic: 8/10

Little Shop of Horrors (1986)

A musical about plants is a very specific Venn diagram of my interests, and this ‘60s-set comedy with Howard Ashman music is the best possible version. Backup singers, celebrity cameos, and a stylized set help it balance the musical and comedy aspects, making for a very catchy soundtrack and for me lose count of how many times I laughed. Crowd: 9/10 // Critic: 9/10

youtube

Paul Rudd Asking You to Wear a Mask

National treasure and “certified young person” Paul Rudd talks about TikTok just like I do.

Get Organized with the Home Edit (2020-)

If you enjoyed Marie Kondo’s Netflix show last year, this new one from the streaming service will scratch the same itch. Clea, Joanna, and their team aren’t as rigorous in their organizing method, but the transformations they perform are still inspiring. They do their magic twice in each episode, including for one celebrity, so if you’ve ever wanted to see how Reese Witherspoon displays her Legally Blonde costumes or how Retta maintains her Poshmark store, stop what you’re doing and start this show right now.

Blazing Saddles (1974)

This spoof of the Western genre lives up to the hype. (More on my thoughts on Westerns below.) Crowd: 9/10 // Critic: 8.5/10

Jumpin’ Jack Flash (1986)

A very far-fetched plot in which Whoopi Goldberg starts chatting with a British secret agent on some very ‘80s technology, but her charisma sells it. It’s another early Nancy Meyers entry, which means now the only movie written and/or directed by Nancy Meyers that I haven’t seen is one obscure ‘80s title I can’t seem to find anywhere—if you know where I can rent, buy, or borrow Irreconcilable Differences, let me know! Crowd: 7.5/10 // Critic: 6.5/10

youtube

Demi Adejuyigbe’s Annual Tribute to “September”

Demi Adejuyigbe was a treasure on Gilmore Guys, and he’s a treasure every year on September 21st. Actually, he’s always a treasure, and this video should be watched every day of the year.

September Critic Picks

Touch of Evil (1958)

It’s a quintessential film noir for a reason. Charlton Heston, Janet Leigh, Orson Welles, Marlene Dietrich, and more make this investigation into a bombing at the U.S./Mexico border complex and compelling. Crowd: 8/10 // Critic: 9/10

The Essentials: 52 Must-See Movies and Why They Matter by Jeremy Arnold (2016)

My sweet friend Maddie gave me the most quintessentially me pop culture gift I can think of: A set of Gilmore Girls-themed colored pencils (!!) and a copy of this Turner Classic Movies book, which provides historical background and filmmaking highlights of 52 of the best movies ever made, including Once Upon a Time in the West (below). I have 17 more of the titles in this book to watch (including a couple that weren’t on my radar already), but I also just learned while writing this that there’s a Volume 2…guess that watch list is just going to get longer!

Double Feature — Agatha Christie Murder Mysteries: The Mirror Crack’d (1980) + Evil Under the Sun (1982)

Last month I shared the trailer for Kenneth Branagh’s Death on the Nile remake, but if you can’t wait for that Agatha Christie adventure, I recommend watching this pair from the ‘80s. And boy, are they star-studded: Jane Birkin! Tony Curtis! Rock Hudson! Angela Lansbury! James Mason! Kim Novak! Diana Rigg! Maggie Smith! Elizabeth Taylor! Both kept me guessing till the end, and you can read my full reviews of The Mirror Crack’d and Evil Under the Sun on ZekeFilm. Both Crowd: 8/10 // Critic: 8.5/10

Double Feature — Classic Westerns: Rio Bravo (1959) + Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Unlike rom-coms, I can’t watch a bad Western and still enjoy myself. (Okay, and let’s be real—there are some great ones that have made me realize this genre just isn’t my cup of tea). The silver lining is it’s a pleasant surprise when they grab me. Rio Bravo (Crowd: 8/10 // Critic: 8.5/10) stands out for an atypically complex Dean Martin role and Howard Hawks’s breezier direction than many Westerns; Once Upon a Time in the West (Crowd: 8/10 // Critic: 10/10) is memorable for an atypically evil Henry Fonda role and Sergio Leone’s artsy direction. Though they don’t have much in common, both were pleasant surprises.

Double Feature — ‘90s Crime Thrillers: The Player (1992) + The Usual Suspects (1995)

In The Player (Crowd: 8.5/10 // Critic: 8.5/10) Tim Robbins is a Hollywood exec getting death threats from a writer he rejected. The problem? He’s not sure which one. As he’s trying to save his career and his life, we’re watching something between a savage spoof and a take-no-prisoners dramatization of how showbiz destroys art and lives. In The Usual Suspects (Crowd: 9/10 // Critic: 9/10), Kevin Spacey is telling the cops about a heist gone wrong, and we’re trying to put together what happened as he flashes back. Both of these movies are full of twists, so hopefully those brief synopses have piqued your interest—I don’t want to give that part of the fun away.

American Graffiti (1973)

The last night before students go to college probably doesn’t include drive-in food or a sock hop-style dance anymore, but the mix of anxiety and hope for the future that George Lucas, Ron(ny) Howard, Richard Dreyfuss, and more captured in American Graffiti is timeless. I flashed back to that specific almost-an-adult angst as I watched—any film that can capture time in a bottle like this is one worth remembering. Crowd: 8/10 // Critic: 9/10

Awake in the Dark by Roger Ebert

While this is will ruffle exactly zero feathers, I’m here to say that Roger Ebert is the real deal. This collection includes 500 pages of reviews of his top films of each year, overviews of movies he thought were overlooked and underrated, interviews, and essays on why criticism matters. An interview with Jimmy Stewart makes you feel like you’re in the room. An essay about The Color Purple fits right in with the #OscarsSoWhite conversation. A review of a movie about a donkey that I’ve never seen almost made my cry. Ebert combines populism and intelligence in his writing, and as one whose whole blog literally revolves around those two ideas, I both admire and envy how great a writer he was.

You Can’t Take It With You (1938)

The last Best Picture winner I needed to see of the ‘30s is one of the most fun I’ve watched yet. Read my Crowd and Critic reviews to see why it’s a worthy winner. Crowd: 9/10 // Critic: 9/10

Rolling Stone Top 500

Trying to wrap your arms around this list is a little like trying to wrap your ears around every album every made and your mind around every piece of good music journalism ever written. So…yes, I’m a little overwhelmed. But I’m pleased as punch several of my most-listened-to albums have made the cut (Harry! Lorde! T. Swift!) and that albums from my lifetime are being affirmed as all-time greats (Continuum! For Emma! Lemonade!) But the biggest takeaway is no surprise: I’ve got a lot of great music I still need to listen to.

Also in September…

I watched another Best Picture winner this month, and while it was deserving, I never want to watch it again. Read my Crowd and Critic reviews of The Silence of the Lambs to find out why this movie disturbed me so much.

On SO IT’S A SHOW? this month, Kyla and I went back to the ‘80s for Top Gun, which is the best we can do until Top Gun: Maverick actually hits the big screen. Then we dug into the ‘60s Beach Party movies of Annette Funicello and Frankie Avalon to see what they had to do with Dean and Lindsay’s marriage on Gilmore Girls.

Photo credits: 52 Must-See Movies, Roger Ebert, Rolling Stone. All others IMDb.com.

0 notes

aion-rsa · 4 years

Text

Warrior Season 2: What to Expect From the Return of the Martial Arts Drama

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

When Warrior premiered in April of last year, Cinemax knew they had a hit right away. Helmed by Fast & Furious director Justin Lin and Banshee co-creator Jonathan Tropper, Warrior was renewed for a second season after just three episodes.

“Warrior comes from the pitch Bruce Lee brought to Warner Brothers,” Tropper says, the writer of the show. “It was an eight page treatment Bruce Lee had written that Shannon [Lee] held onto, and that was where the initial ideas for this show come from.”

The show exists largely through the efforts of Shannon Lee (Bruce Lee’s daughter and the executive producer of the show) to bring one of her father’s many visions to fruition. It’s a true testament that Warrior carries on Bruce Lee’s legacy nearly 50 years since he’s passed.

The gritty action-packed drama is set during the brutal late 19th century Tong Wars of San Francisco’s Chinatown and showcases a largely Asian cast. Loosely based on historical events, Warrior explores the tumultuous Wild West period leading up to the Chinese Exclusion Act, the only law that the United States ever implemented to block immigration of a specific racial profile.

“My father had the main character Ah Sahm (Andrew Koji) coming over from China, getting indoctrinated into the Tongs as a hatchet man, while he was really looking for his sister. It had Bill (Kieran Bew), the police officer, as a character. It had the Tong wars as a backdrop to the show and it had the Chinese Exclusion Act and the political immigration issues of the time as a backdrop to the show.”

With trending immigration issues under the present political regime, Warrior is uncannily topical.

“This has always been an immigrant story,” says Tropper, who started writing the show under the Obama administration and didn’t foresee how relevant it would become in 2020. “For me, it’s not that we were aiming at this topic. It’s just that this topic is never not there. It just happens that people are much more conscious of it right now because of this administration. But America is a country built by immigrants that has never developed a comfortable relationship with immigrants. So it’s a generational problem and it’s a cyclical problem, and it’s one that we have not solved. I feel like thematically, this show would be relevant no matter when it was coming out. Now it just happens to speak really loudly to what’s going on.”

Enter the Dragon – Rising Star Andrew Koji

Politics aside, Warrior has one of today’s hottest actors in the lead role, Andrew Koji. Beyond Warrior, Koji plays the pivotal role of Storm Shadow in the upcoming Snake Eyes: G.I.Joe Origins alongside Henry Goulding (Crazy Rich Asians), Ursula Corbero (Money Heist), Iko Uwais (The Raid), and Samara Weaving (Bill & Ted Face the Music). The film was slated for release this October but was pushed back to 2021 as another COVID-19 casualty.

“If it’s best for the film, for the audience, for people,” says Koji, “I don’t think many people want to go to the cinema right now.”

While the postponement of his first major film was disappointing, it was overshadowed by the announcement that Koji has been cast in Bullet Train starring Brad Pitt and directed by David Leitch.

“I saw the article the other day,” recounts Koji with glee. “I was like, “What’s my face doing next to Brad Pitt’s? Nah. Nah. What’s going on?”

Koji’s character Ah Sahm is the role that Bruce Lee intended for himself. However, Ah Sahm is his own man, only echoing Lee with Easter Egg nods to classic film fight scenes, but the nods are kept low key.

“When he beats up the first two guys at the brothel in the pilot, that is literally the choreography from Way of the Dragon,” Trooper explains. “And then he sits down on the chest of the guy, we’re just totally paying homage there. And then, having done that, we do almost nothing else the rest of the season except the occasional tweak of the nose or the gesture with the hand.”

Brucesploitation is a genre of its own, another surreal testament to Bruce Lee’s legacy. If Koji had just done an impersonation of Bruce, Ah Sahm would have degenerated into yet another Bruce Lee clone. Despite the temptation, and having the blessing of Bruce Lee Entertainment, Warrior would not have succeeded like it has if it were just derivative.

“Of all people, Shannon Lee was really insistent that we don’t go overboard with the Bruce Lee stuff,” continues Tropper. “She really tempered it. We were welcomed to use it, but she really wanted the show stand on its own. She had a sort of ‘less is more’ approach. And I think that turned out to be the wise way to go.”

Despite Koji’s rising star, he’s quick to deflect the credit for the success of Warrior to his cast mates.

“When I see Warrior Season 2 and I see these great actors; Kieran, Tom [Weston-Jones], Hoon [Lee], Joe [Taslim], et cetera, I’m more honored that I’m amongst this cast. When I see their performances I’m like, ‘Whoa, these guys are good, because they’re nothing like this in real life.’ It’s more that it’s an honor to be able to work alongside these people who are just so good at what they’re doing.”

Fist of Fury – Warrior Season 2 Comes Out Fighting

When Ah Sahm was last seen in Season 1, he had lost a brutal duel to Li Yong (Taslim). He falls from grace at Hop Wei Tong to become a coolie. ‘Coolie’ is a Chinese word. ‘Ku’ means ‘bitter’ and ‘li’ means ‘work’ and the coolie world is a hopeless grimy place to be. It sets the stage for Season 2 to blow up.

“The fun of any Season 2, and certainly in this show, is in Season 1 you have to do all the heavy lifting of building the world,” Tropper says. “Season 2, the world’s already built, and now you get to really go deeper into all the characters because you don’t have to spend as much time placing them.”

Season 1 established the three distinct worlds of Warrior: the upper crust world of San Francisco politics, the working class world of the cops, and the lower class, the Irish ghetto and Chinatown.

“These three forces have been put into this pressure cooker where something is going to either give or explode,” continues Tropper, “So in Season 2, it was time to let that pressure cooker explode.”

Lee feels that her father would be pleased with how Warrior has turned out so far. She finds it crazy how relevant the show is today and is excited to see how the next episodes play out.

“Fans can expect, for Season 2, to really up the stakes and up the conflict,” she says. “We’re really going to see things reach a bit of a fever pitch in Chinatown… So it’s very complicated and the weaving of the story is really brilliant and the stakes are really high. And you’ll see what happens.”

Warrior Season 2 introduces several new characters and story arcs. The costumes of Ah Toy (Olivia Cheng) get more lavish and opulent. The fights escalate, getting bigger and bloodier as the season progresses and even includes a face-off between Ah Sahm and Dolph, played by UFC Champion Michael Bisping.

“I don’t think many people would be able to say they kicked a UFC champion in the face and lived,” jokes Koji. Warrior Season 2 would be a sure win if it weren’t for Cinemax’s programming cuts and the fact that it’s 2020, the year of the pandemic.

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic brings an unexpected challenge for a show about Chinatown. Racist attacks against Chinese have been on the rise, so much so that the House or Representatives just passed a resolution condemning “all forms of anti-Asian sentiment as related to COVID-19.” Will this affect the reception of Warrior?

“Gosh, I don’t know,” says Lee. “I certainly hope not. But given the ability of people to be reasonable in this moment that we find ourselves in, I wish I could say, ‘Oh, that would be silly,’ but I feel like the anti-China, anti-Asian sentiment in the country around the coronavirus is silly. There’s a lot that’s gone on that is kind of blowing my mind left and right, so I wish I could say for certain that it wouldn’t. But what I hope happens is that people tune in to the show… because it’s entertaining and they fall in love with it; and maybe it shifts their perspective in some way.”

For Tropper, the relevance of Warrior reflects the pervasiveness of racism.

“I think that just proves the point that whether it is overt or covert, it’s never gone,” he says. “There’s the version of xenophobia towards the Asians. There’s a version of racism towards the Black population. Our country has these fault lines that are always there whether they’re shaking or not. Obviously there are tremendous echoes from our show of what was going on when they started referring to coronavirus as the ‘Chinese flu.’ But if you speak to any Chinese American, I don’t think they’ll tell you it’s ever really been gone. It just goes through periods of quiet and periods of noise. So I think we just happened to be coming out at a kind of noisier time, which is deeply unfortunate. Believe me I’d much rather we were just a fun martial art show that was a lot less relevant today.”

The Road to Warrior Season 3

Unfortunately last January, Cinemax announced that it would no longer be commissioning original shows in preparation for the launch of HBO Max. “Right now, Season 3 is a little uncertain,” says Lee. Warrior Season 2 is an attempt to level the show up to prove it deserves another round.

“We’re in these uncertain times,” says Lee, “but I’m hoping that when the show, once Season 2 completes on Cinemax, they are going to release it to the HBO platforms and I do hope that the show will just catch a much bigger audience and that there will be demands for a third season.”

Why invest in a second season when the future is uncertain? There’s always a chance that the fans may save it. Shows like Star Wars: The Clone Wars, The Expanse, Money Heist, and Cobra Kai found new life and more fans on other networks.

“I’ve got a gut feeling that this show, or at least the legacy of this show, will last a lot longer than most shows,” adds Koji. “I think what it means – the energy, the feeling, the story and the characters – there’s so many elements that just were magic. The writing’s sharper, the action is crisper and embraces its style more. I think the actors are all on point. Season 2 was one of the highlights of my career so far, shooting, and I think it was for a lot of people. We all felt that magic, so we hope that it comes across on-screen, which I believe it will. I think they’re going to see something special on all fronts.”

Koji holds out a lot of hope that Warrior Season 3 will happen.

“Well, obviously, with the current climate it’s a lot less certain. All we know is if the fans make enough noise and help us by making that noise it is in so many of our intentions to wrap this show up as I think it should. Not only for the show, the story, for the fans, but for that legend Bruce Lee. I think it deserves a conclusive ending.”

Regardless of what the future may hold for Warrior, Season 2 is worth the watch.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

Warrior begins its ten-episode second season on Oct. 2, exclusively on CINEMAX.

The post Warrior Season 2: What to Expect From the Return of the Martial Arts Drama appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2S3Ioog

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

namitaylor99 · 4 years

Text

Project Proposal and Research

12/5/20

Idea: Comfort food/human’s conciseness/ figural and its significance in photography

Comfort food, providing a consolation or a feeling of well-being. Everybody has their own sweet and savoury craving, wether its after a long day, a midnight snack or a Sunday morning brunch, we all have one. This personal series will undergo individuals close to me including family and friends, capturing their personality and of course their most desired comfort food. Each image will have its own uniqueness reflecting the person’s characteristics. Constructing an aesthetic series using complimentary colours and artificial lighting to capture theatrical scenes, will tie in each image all possessing the same quality and idea of an individuals own comfort food. I believe this concept connects very nicely to project three, as I will be undergoing this notion of the figural. Figural being a form of significance which relies on imagery and association, capturing symbolic meaning in ones person life. Inspired by Anne Hardy and Henry Hargreaves, and their ability to capture empty spaces and aesthetic foods, still possessing this notion of the lack of human body except its clear that their soul and presence still remain in the image. This feeling of emotion is what I would like to portray and capture in my series.

Journal Articles

The Chicago School of Media Theory: Figurative/Figural

Theorist Micheal Fried, explores the relationship between the figure and literal within the modern art world.

Fried’s understanding of the modern age, views art as literalist and minimalist, suggesting that the whole work “they are what they are nothing more” than shapes, colour and form.

Literal can be seen and used as a metaphor

The introducing of anthropomorphism can be only depended on literalist art once a person seeks a hidden meaning.

Anthropomorphism can be seen as a symbol seen from a singles of a shape.

Literalist art proclaims its object hood

Referring back to literal and the figure, Fried suggest that literalist art is almost seen as non-art because it rejects the representation of art that calls the attention to in the term figure.

The status of an object within Literalist works are further emphasised between the relationship of the view to the artwork in space.

Fried draw attentions around the dichotomy betwen the liter and the furfural and figurative, as he further implies the way in which these dichotomy dissipated within the modern art movement.

Identifying the figure and the literal, yes photography can be seen very literal as we capture something that is clearly identified by all. However once the audience starts to connect the dots (anthropomorphism) thats when the image itself creates it’s own meaning and symbolism.

https://lucian.uchicago.edu/blogs/mediatheory/keywords/figurativefigural/

Comfort Food: Nourishing Our Collective Stomachs and Our Collective Minds by Jordan D. Troisi1 and Julian W. C. Wright1

Food is a powerful motivator in human functioning—it serves a biological need, as emotional support, and as a cultural symbol.

Comfort food in the media is seem as unhealthy, often consumed in moments of stress or sadness

But for anyone who has a love of food and of eating, it will come as no surprise that food also has emotional, cultural, and symbolic mean- ing as well.

Food satisfies our collective minds

Comfort food serve as a memory based link to close others and that those with secure attachment styles would have favorable associations with foods associated with other people.

This article provides information on how society identifies comfort as it can be seen through two perspective, as stress eating (unhealthy food) causing anxiety and is something tradi- tional, cultural, regional, familial, or otherwise imbued with meaning

Eating is the perfect social psychological variable, because it is connected to almost every social variable or process you can think of! (Herman, as cited in Baumeister & Bushman, 2014, p. xxi)

Given the need for humans to consume food in order to maintain numerous homeostatic processes, such topics also seem relevant for courses in biopsychology. Furthermore, there is clear evidence that stressful experiences have numerous bio- logical implications.

This article provides insight on what comfort can really represent for ones individual - it’s a guilty pleasure meal that is close to their hearts. It can be something that endure and crave if feeling overwhelmed or stress which is why some may seem to be fatty and fills with sugar and oil however comfort food isn’t always seen as that. It possess cultural aspects and symbolises their homes - when feeling home sick.

https://journals-sagepub-com.ezproxy2.library.usyd.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1177/0098628316679972

Artists of Inspiration

Through my online journal I have briefly discussed Anne Hardy and Henry Hargreaves, both strongly influencing me for my idea for project three. I have also done research of artist Jeff Wall. I will be elaborating further below on what aspect of these artists works have influenced me and how I will use this to create a capture my own innovative series.

Anne Hardy

Hardy’s work transforms sculpture into photographic ‘paintings’. Though her scenes are built in actuality, their compositions are developed to be viewed from one vantage point only and it’s only their 2 dimensional images that are shown. Hardy uses the devices inherent within photography to heighten her work’s painterly illusion. In Cipher, aspects such as the hazy aura around the fluorescent lights, faux grotto walls, and the spatial defiance of the hanging ropes, give allusion to gesture and drawn lines.

‘Cipher’ 2007

Henry Hargreaves

Photographer Henry Hargreaves and installation artist Nicole Heffron have spent the past year imaging how famous directors might celebrate their birthdays in order to recreate the scenes for a unique photo series. Pictured: The bloodied samurai sword suggests that this cake was intended for Kill Bill director Quentin Tarantino

The image of the staircase on this birthday cake suggests that this birthday cake was intended for the Vertigo director Alfred Hitchcock

The bear-shaped cake here is an instant giveaway that this is the birthday cake of Ted director Seth Macfarlane

The glass of milk in this set up is a subtle suggestion that this sterile birthday is that of the Clockwork Orange director Stanley Kubrick

The scene at Martin Scorsese's knees-up has elements of New York's Little Italy as well as the gambling and cigars of Casino and his first hit Mean Streets

John Waters' identity is given away by his Pink Flamingos cake, a reference to the title of the 1972 movie starring drag queen Divine

What I love the most of Hargreaves food images is how he can create these bloody to half eaten food scenes look so pleasing to the eye even when it should make you feel a little gross out. Food photography I feel is very difficult to capture and the same goes in films. It’s so easy for people to be gross out by them especially when their hands and mouths involved, however Hargreaves manages to create these aesthetic food series, almost making me hungry and wanting to eat those cakes. Hargreaves has inspired in the past with previous food photographs, and he still manages to continue to inspire me now. His work is so intriguing and the use of colour and composition overall ties in the image very nicely. However, instead of capturing celebrities and prisoners on death row, for my own work I want it to be personal. Using the pope around me such as family and friends and capture what their own comfort food is their favourite and what it means to them. Is it a stress comfort food or is something that reminds them of home, child hood or a distant memory. Even for myself and capturing my own comfort food and exploring why I have chosen that specific meal. I believe exploring on this idea of food and the figural, it will ultimately challenge me, and let me undergo such research and even an experience of capturing something more than just a photograph of food but the human soul behind that.

Jeff Wall

I begin by not photographing.

—Jeff Wall

This quote really speaks to me on what art really means to myself. I believe their is so much more than just taking a photo. Behind the scenes artists have to create this ideal image before capturing the photo itself. I love constructing and forming this perfect composition in my mind and capturing it with a camera allows that form to last forever however just creating art itself bringing forth this new world of what photography can really say.

Jeff Wall’s work synthesizes the essentials of photography with elements from other art forms—including painting, cinema, and literature—in a complex mode that he calls “cinematography.” His pictures range from classical reportage to elaborate constructions and montages, usually produced at the larger scale traditionally identified with painting

Some of Wall’s early pictures evoke the history of image making by overtly referring to other artworks: The Destroyed Room (1978) explores themes of violence and eroticism inspired by Eugène Delacroix’s monumental painting The Death of Sardanapalus (1827), while Picture for Women (1979) recalls Édouard Manet’s A Bar at the Folies-Bergère (1882) and brings the implications of that famous painting into the context of the cultural politics of the late 1970s. These two pictures are models of a thread in Wall’s work that the artist calls “blatant artifice”: pictures that foreground the theatricality of both their subject and their production. Dead Troops Talk (1991–92), a large image depicting a hallucinatory moment from the Soviet war in Afghanistan, is a central example, and was one of the first works to employ digital-imaging technology, which has since transformed the landscape of photography. Wall was a pioneer in exploring this dimension and remains at the forefront of its development.

Doing research on Wall and his work, it’s clear he really wants to capture these somewhat candid images however, behind these image unfold stories and visions. His work in a way have these capturing aesthetic scenes that drawn the audience in. It creates a sense of narrative and story lines by one single picture. I did find the “Destroyed Room” to be very fascinating and it held many similarities on what I wanted to create. However after viewing his other works I couldn’t help but be intrigued by his image “Changing Room”, the image itself look as if it’s some kind of painting. I think it also ties in with this theme figure and figural topic. The top half of the body looks as if it's some kind of bird especially the animal pattern on the fabric. However, on the bottom half it’s clear that a women is simply just getting change. The figure itself seems to be part human and animal, thats how I view the image as a whole. And I do believe thats what Wall was trying to capture this weirdly human figure or it could have been by accident of the lady putting the shirt or another from of dress and it just seemed as if it was a bird. Overall Wall’ work is absolutely amazing, it has this sense of allude affect on the scenes, drawing myself within the images, trying to figure this narrative by just viewing one image. I wanna be able to incorporate this whole emotional effect on my own images and creating this sense of narrative.

200 word Project Proposal

Looking at a variety of artists and articles surrounding this whole notion of the figural within art has allowed me to compose a solid idea of what I will be exploring within project 3. Comfort food is known for providing a consolation or a feeling of well-being. Reading 'Comfort Food: Nourishing Our Collective Stomachs and Our Collective Minds’ it provides insight into what comfort food really means for an individual. It can be seen through two perspectives, including stress and anxiety eating, this makes people crave more unhealthy sugary or high fat food, or is something tradi- tional, cultural, regional, familial, or otherwise imbued with meaning to an individual. Gathering both research on the figural/literal themes within art and this whole concept of comfort food, I believe both have similar qualities and can be captured in a unique form. Wanting to approach this project in a more personal outlook, I will be exploring and capturing my friends and families own comfort food and what it means to them. I will also be using myself and my own desired comfort food, to explore and ask questions what makes comfort food comfort?. Inspired by Anne Hardy, Jeff Wall and Henry Hargreaves, each artists has provided a source of inspiration that I will be incorporating within my own work, however still creating an innovative personal series of my own.

0 notes

nofomoartworld · 7 years

Text

Hyperallergic: A Retrospective of Andrew Wyeth, a Painter Both Loved and Loathed

Andrew Wyeth, “Anna Christina” (1967) tempera on panel, 21 ½ x 23 ½ in. jointly owned by the Brandywine River Museum and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, anonymous gifts, 2002 (© 2017 Andrew Wyeth/Artists Rights Society (ARS))

CHADDS FORD, Pa. — Riddle me this: Is the Whitney Biennial a real Whitney Biennial if it goes without protest? In 1960, back when the exhibition was held annually, Edward Hopper urged Andrew Wyeth to sign his letter protesting the near exclusion of realist painting. The artist declined, distancing himself from the New York art world’s socio-political arguments, content with what was in front of him, like Giorgio Morandi with his bottles. Yet, from the late ’60s on, Wyeth would be labeled a reactionary — which is rather like taking issue with a rock for not taking issue with you — and conservative, overlooking John F. Kennedy honoring him in 1963 with a Medal of Freedom for depicting “verities and delights of everyday life” in the “great humanist tradition.” To this day his East Coast critics spend a surprising amount of energy dismissing his relevance.

Jerry Saltz’s 2009 obituary on Wyeth begins by claiming “almost no one in the art world ever thought of or cared much about [him]” thereby slighting Alfred Barr, Elaine de Kooning, and Henri Cartier-Bresson, for starters. More, Robert Hughes did a 180 switch, lauding the painter after his death. “[I]n over three decades in the art world, I have never heard one artist, art student, teacher, critic, collector, or curator mention his name,” Saltz goes on. One wonders whether he missed his wife Roberta Smith’s 1998 New York Times review “New Light on Wyeth’s Outer and Inner Landscapes” on Wyeth’s Whitney Museum show. Was he also completely unaware of photographer Collier Schorr’s obsession with Wyeth’s Helga pictures? “Wyeth was considered so conservative,” Saltz continues, “that even the Metropolitan Museum of Art declined an offer to exhibit his work.” No. The first one-person exhibition the Met ever gave to a living American artist was “Two World’s of Andrew Wyeth: Kuerners and Olsons” curated by director Thomas Hoving in 1976, previewed by Grace Glueck and reviewed by Hilton Kramer in The New York Times, where more argument ensued.

Gwendolyn DuBois Shaw doesn’t ignore art history in her recent piece “Andrew Wyeth’s Black Paintings,” published in the exhibition catalogue for the Brandywine River Museum of Art’s present retrospective on the painter; she rewrites it. It’s not apparent she saw her claimed point of departure: the 2001 “Andrew Wyeth: Close Friends” exhibition of seventy-four works he made of his African-American friends and neighbors over a seventy-year span. But in Shaw’s retelling, Wyeth is a racist oppressor who exploited poor blacks for his own artistic ends. “My issue is more with my field, rather than with the paintings,” Ted Loos cites her as saying, which implies a personal agenda guiding her efforts. It’s helpful to understand this motive, because doing so gives context to the reliably derogatory insinuations and defamatory takes on Wyeth and his art — all free of responsible research.

Shaw makes much of Wyeth’s lifelong black friend and frequent model David Lawrence’s nickname “Doo-Doo,” (which the Wyeth family spelled “Dodo”) to insinuate Wyeth gave him this disparaging moniker. Unmentioned is who dubbed him this — Dodo’s cousin, mom, the mailman? — and that it was only decades later (in the 1950s) “doo-doo” picked up its scatological connotations. So, for the record, Wyeth did not in fact call his best friend “shit.” But Shaw did substantially misrepresent two people’s lives by getting the etymology of six letters wrong. It may seem trivial to address this, but one must select examples of her speculative trivialities when their accumulation is the whole of her piece.

Shaw holds up Senna Moore as the most artistically violated of his models, especially in “Dryad” (2000/2007), where the painter darkens her skin to envelop her within a tree’s shadow. (Dryads are mythological beings that live inside trees.) The incurious takeaway is, in Wyeth’s paintings, “black bodies could be eliminated entirely.” Despite her simplistic reading, Shaw indicates no knowledge that Senna Moore is actually alive — and perhaps available for an interview (as is a male model). In opting out of this exchange, to quote the writer’s own words, Shaw “eliminated entirely” the very black female voice she arrogated herself to speak on behalf of. Knowing none of Wyeth’s models or the artist, Shaw could, to recall her accusation, “exert a great deal of control over how [s]he imagined them.”

Andrew Wyeth painting “Vivian”; still from Andrew Wyeth: Self-Portrait (Snow Hill), directed by Bo Bartlett

In Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania over 100 works by Andrew Wyeth are on display at the Brandywine for Andrew Wyeth: In Retrospect, a comprehensive exhibition covering works from 1936 to his last in 2008, titled “Goodbye.” An agrarian in an age of war, living “farm to table” in contemporary parlance, his subjects — neighbors, the fields, woods, and streams, dilapidated houses, interiors mixed with still lifes, scandalizing nudes, shorelines, boats, and boots — have potential to inspire and disgust, weary and delight, according to the viewer and often the era’s politics.

Were Wyeth not so beloved by the general public, it’s unlikely the critics — mostly writing in the popular press — would have been so committed to scorning him. The policing of borders separating fine art from illustration was first-order, boring business for critics whose opinions on Wyeth were evidently ignored, if they registered at all with collectors and postcard-buyers alike. Surveys conducted in 1973 and 2006, years bookending Wyeth’s most tarred and feathered moments in the press, evidenced no alteration in the museum-going public’s approval: 86% for “enjoyment” of his paintings, according to exhibition exit polls by Wanda M. Corn and Lynda M. O’Leary. Wyeth sought to make images widely intelligible and by succeeding in that, rendered third-party mediation largely irrelevant, surely a sore spot for professional mouthpieces of taste. This meant authoritative interpretation of his art was his own, exemplified by Thomas Hoving’s choice to interview the artist for the 1976 exhibition catalogue, rather than commission essays.

Wyeth, elsewhere, writes: “I think one’s art goes as far and as deep as one’s love goes. I see no reason for painting but that. If I have anything to offer, it is my emotional contact with the place where I live and the people [I know].

This quote is slightly revolting in its sentimentality. We rid ourselves of softer emotions in 20th-century art. But “deep love” is not saccharine if we imagine that Wyeth had been a poet, novelist, or essayist. Think of beauty, for example.

“At some point in life the world’s beauty becomes enough. You don’t need to photograph, paint or even remember it. It is enough.”

Okay, that one’s by Toni Morrison. See? It’s nice. It’s a literary attitude, perhaps, that’s needed to enter the world of Andrew Wyeth, which is not to say it’s easy. Francis Weiss, in the academic reader Rethinking Andrew Wyeth, posits Robert Frost as akin to Wyeth in artistic aim. “You and I have something in common,” Frost wrote Wyeth, “that almost makes me one wonder if we hadn’t influenced each other, been brought up in the same family.” They both aimed their art at the common viewer, eschewing urbane tastes, crafting work within a familiar tradition.

Despite the criticism claiming Wyeth’s weathered pastorals were escapist, the works are, like Frost’s poems, a space for darker dreaming and experiencing alienation, isolation, and a distinctly 20th-century form of anxiety. “At its most aesthetically convincing,” Donald Kuspit holds, “Wyeth’s art brings us to consciousness of the body’s existence — bodiliness as such, bodiliness as the essence of existence.” This seems right. All of his works, at least from the late 1940s on, are relentlessly focused at an observational level, almost cruel at times, while suffused with a range of moods, from the austere to the theatrical, as if visual facts were a container for fictions. Or, invoking the novelist Émile Zola’s words: “a corner of creation seen through a temperament.”

The Japanese see abstract meanings too. In the new catalogue for the Brandywine exhibition, Shuji Takahashi reveals why Wyeth’s work is collected in Japan more than in any other country but this one, and why Wyeth felt more understood there. His paintings reflect “the Japanese sense of life and death, a belief … that people are part of the great cycle of nature.” The tempera “Thin Ice” (1969) in the show is the most abstract piece, and is exhibited in America for the first time in decades. The orange and brown leaves in a stream under an ice sheet suggest a painter who could’ve been an accomplished abstract artist had he not found the genre dull.

The Japanese never succumbed to the form of western modernity Wyeth’s art rejects, that is, the separation of truth from beauty. Here, what is beautiful cannot be true, and what is true cannot be beautiful. Europe caught this earlier, with the First World War — hence Dadaism — and then this view rose in the United States with WWII. Jackson Pollock and the Abstract Expressionist’s bent toward self-obliteration was incommensurable with a tenacious realism holding forth that humans are inherently dignified. Pop Art then successfully brought back realist imagery, but only by exhausting the meaning of the images’ referents. It’s striking to note Wyeth’s painting of Tom Clark in “Chester County” (1962) was made the same year Warhol introduced his serialized images of Campbell’ Soup. Wyeth was pursuing the human affect in his paintings that Pop Art was laying to rest.

When Robert Rosenblum said in 1977 that Andrew Wyeth was both the most overrated and underrated living American artist, he had it right. The “best” and “worst” artist would’ve been better candidates, but in accounting for collective perceptions, Wyeth did divide. This friction is playing out at the Museum of Modern Art right now. “Christina’s World” (1938), the famous painting of crippled Christina crawling up a hill toward home, was acquired as a work then considered categorically modern, surrealist. But as its popularity grew with the public, the museum’s curatorial thrust instead went toward Abstract-Expressionism, forcing MoMA into its present fix. It keeps the painting at home to do the heavy lifting — it’s their Mona Lisa for ticket sales and merchandising — but rejects displaying it as a great work of art. It’s rarely lent, citing concerns about its condition, a claim contradicted by their relegating it to the heavily trafficked hallway, to be appreciated en route to the toilet. Thus the rub: the museum’s curators let visitors know Wyeth is not a canonical artist, to be put in an legitimate gallery space, while also being substantially reliant on his work for financial support.

The artist’s watercolor landscapes are often considered his best works, or to his dedicated detractors, the least bad — which might in part be due to their purported affinity to Abstract Expressionism. Regardless, they are great works. There are no physical, mental, or material intermediaries between the artist’s spirit and his image. Wyeth’s brush does not represent the subject; it discovers it. The painting is a visual artifact and its process of making are the result of an experiential whole of pointed intention. Mistaking his facility as bravura, which is often done with these works, is like mistaking the beauty in an athlete’s skill — hard won by discipline — for ease.

Given that so much handwringing has been generated about Wyeth for at least the last fifty years, his work is already interesting. The criticisms against him are more rich, varied, and contradictory than any other artist of the 20th century, with him being both lascivious and sexually repressed, impossibly fantastical and boringly descriptive, embarrassingly sentimental and oppressively racist, idyllic and depressed, undeservedly famous and nobody at all. The reasons to like him are less fanciful and few. He was a good guy, made likable pictures, and was a fantastic painter with a rare deftness of touch, able to make innumerable paintings of the same hill and never repeat himself, nail a subject in six seconds or six months, paint from imagination a picture more convincing than a photograph, keep brushes wet for 75 years, and have it in him to paint a “Goodbye” when he knows it’s time to go.

Andrew Wyeth: In Retrospect continues at the Brandywine River Museum of Art (1 Hoffman’s Mill Road, Chadds Ford, PA) through September 17, 2017.

The post A Retrospective of Andrew Wyeth, a Painter Both Loved and Loathed appeared first on Hyperallergic.

from Hyperallergic http://ift.tt/2gIvH33 via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Hyperallergic

2 notes · View notes

oliviarthomasba2a · 5 years

Text

Story Adaption - Week 2

This week we looked at Victorian culture - the era in which the book was written and based on. Within this we explored the concept of duality and how this can be considered and used in our task - why was this important?

In the Victorian era, shame culture was that of a big deal and there were many expectations to uphold. Moral surveillance tied to this, with people having the pressures of maintaining a certain way to behave and act in accordance with what was seen as ‘right’.

As a whole, the Victorians were a nation of drug takers. Many people frequented opium dens. It was possible to walk into a chemist and buy, without a prescription, laudanum, cocaine and even arsenic.

This links in with Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde since drug taking/addiction is a theme within the story.

The themes of the story are still relevant today - which is why its story/concept has been so used and adapted to this day, This is because people can relate and connect with it in some way. However, the ‘Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde was a product of its time.

It was a fable of Victorian anxieties’ (Saposnik, 1971, p175).

On the surface, Victorians were expected to be moral and well-behaved. They tried to follow the moral example of Queen Victoria. ‘Conduct; books were popular and told people (especially women) how to behave. However, there was a lot more going on under the surface:

The Awakening Conscience by William Holman Hunt (1853)

This image was hugely controversial at the time. It shows a philanderer fondling his mistress. The Victorians didn’t like to have their hypocrisy pointed out to them.

Above all, women faced extra difficulty: the visible evidence of their ‘wrongdoing’.

‘Found Drowned G.F Watts (c.1850)

This drowned girl, likely impregnated and likely suicidal, exemplifies the Victorian trope of the fallen woman’ (King, 2007).

In summary:

Victorian England was a place of strict religious morals.

Violation of the moral code could lead to social ruin (loss of job, home, family, childre, status.) and possible imprisionment.

Nut the social represssion of ‘unacceptable desires’ didn’t erradicate those deesires. They simply forced people of hide them.

The Victorian man was haunted constantly by the inescapable sense of division. As rational and sensual being, as a public and private man, as a civilised and bestial creature, he found himself necessarily an actor, playing only that part of himself suitable to the occasions.’ (Saposnik, 1971).

Main events of Chapter 1:

We meet Gabriel Utterson, a lawyer (non-judgmental by nature).

He’s out walking with a distant cousin, Mr Enfield, when they pass a shabby-looking door.

Enfield tells Utterson a story. On a ‘black winter morning,’ he saw a strange man run headlong into a little girl (who was on her way to fetch a doctor) knocking her to the ground and trampling over her body.

As Enfield tells it - he ‘grabs’ hold of Hyde. The doctor arrived (’with a strong Edinburgh accent, and was about as emotional as a bagpipe’).

‘Well, sir, he was like the rest of us: every time he looked at my prisoner, I saw that Sawbonesturned sick and white with a desire to kill him.’ (1000, p.31)

Even the women, ‘as wild as harpies’, wanted to kill Hyde.

Mr Enfeild:

We can assume he’s a ‘dirt stop-out’.

On the night in question, returning home from ‘someplace at the end of the world’ his ‘way lay through a part of town...all lighted up as if for a procession, and all as empty as a church’ (Stevenson, 1979, p.31).

Consider the symbolism of the ‘empty church’.

Mr Hyde:

‘a little man who was stumping along eastward at a good walk’ (1979, p.31).

‘a kind of black sneering coolness - frightened too’ (1979, p.32)

‘There is something wrong with his appearance; something displeasing, something downright detestable. I never saw a man I so disliked, and yet I scarce know why. He must be deformed somewhere; he gives a strong feeling of deformity’ (1979, p.34).

Mr Utterson:

Can Utterson really be as innocent as he appears? (According to Stevenson - yes).

How rounded is Utterson’s character? We know almost nothing about his private life. We do know that he represses his natural instincts (whatever they may be). He is given to ‘self-mortification in order to stifle temptation’ (Saposnik, 1971).

As the story progresses he becomes obsessed with Hyde. An idea to consider could be what Utterson’s version of Mr Hyde would be if he were to release it - what are his desires and his ‘evil’ thoughts/urges.

We must remember that Jekyll and Hyde are the same people. Jekyll deliberately creates Hyde for the purpose of behaving ‘badly’ and getting away with it.

‘Henry Jekyll [...] is nobody’s hero’.

He represents the ‘cry of the Victorian man from the depths of his self imposed underground’ (Saposnik, 1971).

In the final chapter, we learn that Jekyll cannot reconcile ‘an impatient gaiety of disposition (loose morals) with his ‘imperious desire to carry [his] head high’ (1979, 0.81).

He wants to appear better than everyone else.

When comparing the ‘self-imposed underground’ from Victorian Britain with contemporary social attitudes have changed. Generally attitudes towards race, gender and sexuality have shifted and changed. Due to civil rights and social justice movements are kinder and more accepting society. However, this isn’t the case in many places across the world.

However, the desire for a more ‘just’ society has led to the creation of new rules and conventions. We can see these rules have good intention, but equally, they have consequences when they are broken. These consequences can be severe.

Dr Rachel Hewitt, writing about the history of emotion in A Revolution of Feeling (2017) suggests that what seems to be very personal emotions are actually products of the time and place in which we live.

The word ‘emotion’ had to do with movement, or disturbance, usually of a riotous political nature. We carry this across to our language today when ‘emotional’ people are seen as less ‘rational’. In fact, Hewitt makes the point that language ‘offers the clearest view of how cultural attitudes shape our personal experiences of feeling’.

This reflects the importance to our culture of ‘propriety, decorum, politeness and respectability’ (Hewitt, 2017).

‘Emotion is… produced at the intersection between each person and the culture they inhabit’ (Hewitt, 2017). We can easily see, therefore, how the phenomenon is known as ‘group think’ might come about…

GROUPTHINK:

Group pressure leads individuals to ignore personal doubts or ‘inconvenient’ realities, often stereotyping or dehumanizing other ‘groups’ to reinforce their own sense of morality.

‘Social emotion’: our emotions can be culturally dependent

We then looked at a really interesting case of 21st-century shaming. In this day and age, we’ve almost become too offended and in cases proud of our moral justice. When a harmless joke is taken the wrong way it can have huge consequences and in an attempt to show off our own moral beliefs and what we think is ‘right’ we can destroy others. Progressive?? Maybe not. For me, progression is helping one another to learn and see mistakes and understand from others point of view - not to be self-righteous and put others down in a way to bring yourself up.

TED (2015) How one tweet can ruin your life/ Jon Ronson.

youtube

‘We could get them.’ ‘That’s when the anger turned to excitement.’ ‘We were like unpaid shaming interns for Google.’

“Dehumanizing people is a very human thing to do… because humans want to destroy a person and at the same time not feel bad about it"

#storyadaptation

0 notes

ericleo108 · 3 years

Text

Blog Navigation List 2021

“Let go of the past and go for the future.” - Henry David Thoreau

Blog Navigation List: 2020, 2019

Last Updated 01/02/21

Media and Treatise List:

🙏Sentientism 2020 - This post contains insights into my mind, the voice in my head, and about Gaia and Knhoeing. Sentientism is the religion of Gaia & Knhoeing. It's based on "natural consequence" where people worship through action. This post explores what sentientism is, where it came from, and where it’s going.

✨💕Emma Watson Cosmic Love - In this short personal post I explain why Emma Watson is my cosmic love. I reference my book “108” and show how new semantics are reflected through Emma artistically showing my name in yellow.

Journal list:

#blog navigation #blogger #history #science #logic #sustainability #emma watson #book #books #published #gender equality #racism #plato #sentientism

1 note · View note

unfair-sports · 6 years

Text

The OSG Fantasy Report

Special shoutout to our OSG for these fantasy tips:

Pittsburgh -5.5 at Cleveland (46.5) I’m always a fan of stacking Big Ben and Antonio Brown. But do not confuse Cleveland’s record last season with having a bad defense. The Steelers have not gone into Cleveland and hung big numbers on their division rival. So the price you have to pay for the combo doesn’t come at a low price. However they are so good that they can break any matchup any week. ✅. So Antonio Brown is an excellent play and I can’t talk you off of him✅. They have years of a working relationship and will have very little kinks to work out. If Antonio is priced too high, pivot to JuJu Smith-Schuster. ✅James Connor✅ in the backfield can be some value with Bell missing week 1. Again, Cleveland was one of the best run defenses last season although they struggled with pass catching backs. So if he is a plug and play in Bell’s role with the price and machine that Pittsburgh is, he could present some value. There are other value backs gaining traction so he could go over looked as I usually do not enjoy playing offenses in division games. They know each other well. Cleveland is a mystery to me for week 1. Yes Josh Gordon can go wild. Yes Jarvis Landry can get 8-10 targets. I just think they are a little risky which sets up for great tournament plays of course. ✅With a new QB in place I always approach these week 1s with caution. Though I love David Njoku ✅at tight end. Mainly because of their new QB whom loved to throw to Charles Clay in Buffalo. Tyrod Taylor ✅checks in as an excellent play in all formats. His ability to throw with better weapons than he’s ever had mixed with his run ablilty has had him consistently hitting value for his price. Although I hate division games this isn’t the Steel Curtain he’s facing. Add him to your player pool. Cincinnati at Indy -3 (46.5) If there is one team I’ve stacked too much it’s the Cincinnati Bengals. How long can Andy Dalton play with a guy like AJ Green and be mediocre? I guess I should say I play Green too much. It’s not him that has failed me. It’s Dalton’s inability to get him the ball downfield. With that said any combo of AJ Green with Dalton or second year WR John Ross should be ok against one of the worst secondaries from a year ago inside of a dome. However I prefer AJ Green without the Dalton stack ✅. If Joe Mixon✅ is going to be a bell cow he too can be depended on to be in a position to run for 80-100 yards and see the end zone. If you a PPR site player Gio Bernard can add some value and a potential pass catching TD for a running back. If Andrew Luck is healthy and gets blocked for, TY Hilton ✅could enjoy success Sunday. 8-10 targets. A potential 100 yard game, and maybe 2TDs inside of his home dome where he is so much more effective. While I believe Marlon Mack is the guy, you could see a committee out of the backfield. This is a stay away from me. —both tight ends here can be of value. Tyler Eifert while he is still healthy. And Jack Doyle. ✅He played almost all of Lucks snaps in the preseason. And can be forgotten about. SF at Minn-6 (46) Finally some Jimmy G in my life again. However he comes out of the gate as a road dog against one of the better pass defenses from last season. Again, however this game is in a dome and once Jimmy G took over last season, the 49ers were at the top each week in plays per game. They moved at face pace and the game could shoot out. Jimmy G to Goodwin ✅can be a boom or bust stack but I’m thinking boom this week. Throw in Garçon ✅whom looked good last year with below average quarterbacks. Pairing him with George Kittle ✅for red zone TDS could pay off as well. I’m not a fan of Carlos Hyde and Matt Breida. But this is a well coached team with an excellent old school player and analyst turn GM. They will run the ball inside the 5. If you guess right between the two then kudos. But I am fading that situation. Minnesota will probably gain more ownership being 6 point favorites at home. And rightfully so. The faster SF plays the more chances Minnesota gets. My only hesitation is Kirk Cousins still needing to work on timing with Diggs and Thielen. Cousins enjoys pushing the ball up field. And this is usually only a week 1-2 issue for me. New QBs in a new system with new weapons. It just takes time. If you’re not worried about that then a full stack across multiple lineups are recommended.✅ Cousins-Diggs. Cousins-Diggs. Kyle Rudolph on his own to fill in TE. Even Dalvin Cook who was off to a great start before tearing his ACL last season. But Latavius Murray may split carries with him. Maybe even goal line work to ease Cook back. Splits are hard to roster. You’re guessing 50/50 Houston at New England -7 (51) Finally a 50 over/under. Deshaun Watson was lights out and I expect that to continue week 1. Can he be that efficient? Probably not. But I’m going to take a chance. ✅Deandre Hopkins can have a college QB and he still gets 10-12 targets or more and I will have Watson-Hopkins stacks ✅. Will fuller is a boom or bust play. But the biggest surprise is how much Lamar Miller was so much more effective with Watson in. He should see goal line work IF and that’s a big if Houston moves the ball upfield. New England’s pass defense grades out much better than their run D. New England is the for the first time in a long time bringing off season drama into week 1. That could fire up Tom Brady in a fast pace 50 over game. He’s priced high but “guaranteed” to have success. I just always see this with New England. They come out slow in September. ✅Everybody downs them and then they pick it up as the season progresses and eases into the top of a weak AFC East. Buffalo. The jets. Miami. Easy street. I would normally love Rex Burkhead as New England runs the ball inside the 5 and is an excellent value play. ✅ Chris Hogan is WR1 and is dirt cheap. He could see 10-12 targets.✅ Gronk is priced high and is like a WR. He went 8/89, 1TD here last season so by all means play Gronk✅. I’m not into the fringe play of Sony Michel this week as he is banged up. But it is Billichek. Anybody can catch or run a TD. Anytime. Tennessee -1 at Miami (45.5) Maybe I’m wrong but I’m fading Tennessee as I frequently did last season. I will say this however. They have a new coach. New pass catching back with Dion Lewis and with no Demarco Murray, Derrick Henry steps in as a RB1. But I’m not sure how they split these two backs. Until Mariotta shows me something in week 1 I’m off of this offense until I can figure them out. We should note that Mariotta is efficient once in the red zone and can get it done on the ground and get in the end zone. That’s why I would rather have him alone as oppose to a stack. But give my Tyrod Taylor over him all day. Miami is almost as unappealing. There’s always a butt. There was some weeks that But-Cutler was relevant to fantasy. And if you can work with cutler you can work with Ryan Tannehill. Landry is gone and Parker may miss week 1 which would firmly place a cheap Danny Amendola✅ high on the list in cash games and tournaments. He’s determined to make a statement after leaving New England. And could be placed in a large role and Tennessee’s pass defense is not the best although not the worst. For the price and volume you can take a chance if you believe Miami can move the ball and score 2-3 touchdowns. And if you believe that you can say the same argument for Kenyan Drake ✅who is being touted in the Pre season and was very usable in fantasy last season. I will have shares of Drake. But I don’t see a reason to chance it with Tannehill. Tampa Bay at New Orleans -9.5 (49.5) It would be hard for me to roster Evans and Godwin even with Famous Jameis. Now he’s suspended for the first four games. And we add a true back up. They will be playing from behind and could lead to some garbage time touchdowns. New Orleans is the spot to target starting with Drew Brees. He could spread the ball around and you have to place Michael Thomas and Ted Ginn, Jr. for the Big play capability. “They” say Alvin Kamara is due for negative regression when it comes to effiency. But sometimes “they” are wrong. If they get a lead, Mike Gillislee (while Mark Ingram is suspended) could take some carries. But the reason for the lead is going to be Brees-Kamara-Thomas-Gin✅ somehow. They are on a positive side of a 49 over under in the dome at home where they have been explosive. Jax -3 at NYG (44) This game has a low total. The cheap WR for Jacksonville may be chalk. I would rather take the guaranteed load of Leonard Fournette as oppose to the pass game. I’ve lived and died on Blake Bortles more than I would like to admit. This game is one of the lower totals. But I could see myself taking a shot on Dede Westbrook over Keenan Cole. While the Giants prospect may be better this year. I will not jump on that train vs The Jax defense. While I like the Barkley addition and Evan Engram to get better this is not an ideal offense to target. From a game theory perspective however, Jalen Ramsey may shadow Odell Beckham which could funnel targets to the tight as happened last season. My exposure will not go past Engram and Barkley. Buffalo at Baltimore -7 (41) If you can name the starting QB in Buffalo here then you can play him. The total is very low here. Long term we may have interest in Crabteee and John Brown in the future but maybe not here. But we do love Alex Collins✅. He is at a great price point to garner 100 yards and a touchdown or two. He’s a touchdown favorite at home vs. a bad team. KC at LA Chargers -3.5 (47.5) I’m very excited about the Chiefs this year. Hunt and Hill should be targets for big plays all season. Hill is risky this week vs a very very good Chargers secondary. He does feel that Mahomes can hit him in strides and this makes for the big play. One 80 yard TD strike along with 2-4 catches for 20 a more yards is decent. But if that’s what you’re banking on then maybe not. We want efficiency in fantasy and this is a defense you do not want to target. Hunt could also see plenty of work and is my preferred target here this week. The Chargers on the other hand we can target. KC projects to be one of the worst defenses this season and will be a target spot all year. ✅Play Melvin Gordon here while he is healthy for sure. He will get pass work. Goal line work and in between the 20 work. 20-25 touches. 1-2 touchdown upside is what we search for and this could be a prime spot for it. I’m less excited about Phillip Rivers as I never get him right. Kills me in excellent matchups, thrives when I fade him in tough spots. Regardless he to Keenan Cole is an excellent stack. -speaking of stacking. ✅ Sometimes you want to run a stack back with an opposing team. If you think the chargers have a lead maybe it forces mahomes to throw more. So you either target him and hill or hunt for garbage TDS or the Chargers defense for Turnovers if he throws too much. Im siding with the Chargers defense. ✅ Seattle at Denver -2.5 (42) Seattle is still not a team I like to target. I used to do the Wilson Baldwin connection. But until they show me something I’m off of this team. Especially as road dogs in the altitude vs a good defense. I may enjoy Denver’s long term success but with a very low over of 42 this isn’t ideal. If you’re forced into it on an afternoon slate Emanuel Sanders was a target monster with well below average QB play. So with an upgrade in QB with Case Keenum, whom also loves to target the slot, you can make a case for their stack. I would avoid the split RB situation until we see definite results. Washington at Arizona (even) (44) Don’t you just love games with no favorite. That’s Vegas saying “I give up” Washington got check down Charlie I mean Alex Smith in the off-season. I’m interested in seeing how this offense shakes out. I targeted Washington a lot the past two years. I successfully placed in tournaments with Kirk Cousins and Jordan Reed. With smith there who loves to check down, this week could be a Jordan Reed week ✅. If he’s fully healthy, and can find a connection with Smith, he has 80 yard 1-2 TD upside similar to Gronk but with a lighter price. I’m also interested to see if Adrian Peterson can cut thru holes behind a decent offensive line. But he will split with Chris Thompson and Fat Rob Kelley. I’m not interested in AZ much more. Always a butt. Larry Fitzgerald will have a plus matchup in the slot with Sam Bradford back in our lives. If you want to target older players you do it early in the season while everybody is healthy and fresh. David Johnson however is young and back and is an excellent play in all formats✅. He runs. He catches. He scores! Dallas at Carolina Dallas used to be a favorite target of mine with Dak and Zeek. This is because we know where the offense is coming from. I would not target any pass catchers here. Dak is playable but this will be a slow paced game. Dallas plays slow and run the ball. Carolina plays slow. Probably so Cam won’t have to throw so much 🤔. However Ezekiel Elliott is playable in all formats ✅week in and week out until further notice. Rumors say he is expected to get more pass game work. Which is now more than ever needed without Dez or Whitten. Carolina will be appealing for two things this week. Legs. The legs of Cam should provide fantasy upside ✅and is a great tournament play this week. Christian McCaffrey is expected to be more of a runner this year and not just a pass catching player. The likely chance that McCaffrey catches a TD pass and runs one could make the Cam-McCaffrey stack viable✅. Funchess or Olsen is more likely to catch a TD from Cam than Allen Hurns. But Cam is the kind of WB you don’t have to stack.

#fantasyfootball #fantasy #football #nfl #yahoofantasy #espnfantasy #espn

0 notes