The End

What does Armageddon, The Day After Tomorrow, and 2012 all have in common? You guessed it! They are all apocalyptic movies. In some movies the world is destroyed whereas in others the world is saved. So why did I choose these three movies out of all the apocalyptic movies made throughout the years? Not only are they relatively recent, but these movies, in particular, arise out of a culture in crisis (given recent global warming changes) and moreover, depict a world that is able to find solidarity and achieve a sense of community. In these three particular movies, we see a world devastated and plagued by fear, disaster, tragedy, and death. Faced with adversity and disaster, we see strangers come together, form a bond, and band together to solve a particular problem. This is most evident in the movie Armageddon. It is interesting to note in almost all three movies there exists a dramatic shift in the behaviour of the characters and of humanity, in general, when faced with an impending catastrophic event. Phone calls are made to family members and/or relatives in different parts of the world, the last moments are spent with loved ones, husbands and wives share a lasting embrace with each other and with their children, and last but not least, people desperately attempt to resolve conflict and apologize to others for what they did in the past. The phrases "I know we haven't talked in a while, but I never got to tell you enough about how proud I am...or how sorry I am for...or that I love you", are all too common in apocalyptic films. It is a very interesting human behavioural phenomenon and it's as if humanity's recognition that they are faced with inevitable death transcends their daily problems or conflicts. Humans, in essence, undergo some sort of behavioural change. That begs the question: Why not say the aforementioned phrases or work to resolve differences now? Why do humans, in these movies, often times wait until death to act? I believe that it is when humans are faced with an impending doom that they ultimately realize and come to terms with the essence of life, its fragility, as well as human goodness.

Here is an example from the movie Armageddon of how, when faced with world-wide catastrophe, global solidarity and peace prevail and transcend political, cultural, and economic problems and divisions.

A Response to "My Best Friend Is A Monster"

The original post can be found here: http://jesusandpc.blogspot.ca/2012/03/my-best-friend-is-monster.html

This post dealt with the portrayal of monsters in film as striving to seek redemption, its applicability to our own lives, and how these monsters are models for christian values such as love and forgiveness. Although monsters can be portrayed as foul creatures, this post argues that they do have the potential to express emotion, love, and remorse.

I will argue in favour of this post as I too feel that the audience can, in some way, relate to these monsters. As discussed in lecture, we study monsters in order to understand ourselves. When we are confronted with metaphorical monsters, we are attracted to the goodness that they can reflect in us. I believe that often times, monsters are portrayed in film or in literature as 'broken' figures who are not only monsters on the outside but also possess or are faced to deal with 'internal monsters'. Film and literature, such as in Frankenstein and in The Picture of Dorian Gray, depict the monster's internal struggle and the focus on this internal struggle and their desire to seek redemption is a characteristic that attracts the audience - in a sense we live vicariously through these monsters. As an example, the monster in Frankenstein, exudes emotions that are characteristic of a human in his attempt to integrate himself into society. In Kenneth Branagh's 1994 version of the story, as seen in Cowan's (2008) article, the creature even goes so far as to ask about his soul, saying: What of my soul? Do I have one? Or was that a part you left out? Even in the trailer for Dorian Gray he says "I've done dreadful things...monstrous things...and there will be a price". He later says "I have seen my soul, and there will be a price". So this movie, and more specifically, the character of Dorian Gray depicts a monster and his internal struggle and his curse. Characters' concern for their sins and for their soul ultimately ties in to your comment that you made about Christian faith and the belief that repentance for our sins by striving to do better, will render forgiveness. Humanity's tendency to relate to monsters comes as a result of the fact that like monsters, we too, have internal struggles that we must face and come to terms with.

Response to "Sex Education"

Original post can be found here: http://jc-and-pc.blogspot.ca/2012/03/sex-education.html

Jessica's post entitled "Sex Education" dealt with the issue of whether or not to provide sex education to children in schools, and subsequently, what the content should be for that sex education. I believe that the debate is not whether or not there should be sex education, but rather, it is a debate over morality and the direction that our society is going in. I agree with you 100% that schools should begin implementing class discussions geared toward educating students and raising awareness about sex. The problem for me is not with whether or not there should be sex education but at what age? Is the educational system exposing its students too early? If there is an early onset of exposure, does that make children more prone to engage in sexual activity earlier than if they weren't exposed to it at an early age? These are questions that I don't necessarily have an answer for and something that the educational system should consider and has considered. Moreover, is it really up to the educational system to educate children or does sex education fall under the umbrella of parental responsibilities? In my opinion, I feel that the family unit, in addition to serving as an avenue for emotional support and source of attachment, is an influential context wherein a child is able to develop and where family values can shape a child's sexual behaviour. This is not necessarily true for all families and children, and in this case, sex education in schools would be beneficial.

Part of the limitations for implementing sex education in high schools could involve the issue of religion, and how that could limit the content and extent of the education. The Catholic religion preaches abstinence before marriage and according to the ADVERT website, "abstinence from sexual activity outside marriage is the expected standard for all school age children". If this were to be the prevailing approach to sex education then what about students who are not Catholic? Is it fair to impose Catholic values and beliefs on those students who are not Catholic themselves and do not believe in abstinence?        Although valuable, it has been argued that using the abstinence-only message does omit crucial information, which is critical for protecting a teen's health. Safe sex education can be considered a right regardless of religion.  

To Sell Sex or Not To Sell Sex: I wish I could look like that

An interesting documentary and segue into the issue of sex, gender, and advertising:

Let's start off by watching this clip:

When looking at the video results for the axe commercial, it is statistically more appealing and most watched by/popular with males between the ages of 45-54, followed by males between 35-44, and finally males between 25-34 years of age. Does this commercial tell men that if they use the axe product they will have an easier time attracting beautiful women? In the commercial, yes, but in reality, this would probably not be the case. Herein lies the problematic of advertising...the creation of false stereotypes in order to sell a particular product. Is it affective? CERTAINLY! Advertising in essence, depends on stereotypes because stereotypes convey information or messages within the confines of a thirty second commercial.

In lecture it was stated that advertising and the messages that it conveys to the audience ultimately serve to objectify, commodify, and victimize young women. Young women are bombarded by advertisements that continually portray 'the perfect woman' - proportionately perfect body with an immaculate face...blemishes are unheard of in the advertising industry. By using ideal and often times photoshopped women, advertisements create 'desire', 'want', and the need to adhere to created gender stereotypes. Gender stereotypes, then, can be considered social or cultural constructs of sexual identity. 

So what does this mean for women and for men? Two words: Perpetual dissatisfaction. In an earlier blog post, I talked about the concept of perpetual dissatisfaction, which was found in Mary Jo Leddy’s book entitled Radical Gratitude. Originally referred to a perpetual dissatisfaction that pertained to obtaining material goods, the concept of perpetual dissatisfaction can also be applied to being dissatisfied with one's appearance in comparison to the ideal appearance of a woman or a man in an advertising campaign. I feel that this dissatisfaction with one's own appearance leads mainstream culture to desire what is unrealistically portrayed in advertisements. Young women, in particular, are victims of this type of culture. Poor eating habits, extreme dieting, lack of self-efficacy, self-worth, and self-esteem are all consequences, which in turn can, in some circumstances, lead to mental illnesses such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa.  


Here are some interesting advertisements that I was able to find:


          

Apparently sex even sells toilet paper:

Monsters Inc.

Rona Barrett, an American columnist and businesswoman, once said: "it's ironic, but until you can free those final monsters within the jungle of yourself, your life, your soul is up for grabs". This quote, in essence, is the perfect segue into the lecture topic of God, monsters, and the function of monsters in the Christian tradition. 


Everyone has a different perception of what constitutes something or someone as being a monster or monstrous, respectively. We usually tend to think of monsters as being massive, grotesque figures that serve to terrorize and instill fear in others. Then there are those monsters, which, despite not possessing the physical characteristics of a monster, exude monstrous qualities through their actions or ways of rationalizing their actions. A monster is defined as having an abnormal physical structure or one who deviates from normal behaviour. That being said, despite the negative perceptions of monsters that we have formed from our "monster-in-the-closet" or "monster-under-the-bed" days, I feel that monsters not only reveal who we really are but also serve to give rise to our own failings and troubles. This refers back to the quote at the beginning of this blog which says that there are 'inner monsters' in all of us and until we come to terms with them, our souls will never be free. I feel that we are often times afraid of our 'inner monsters', and it is through monsters in film and on television, that we are made aware of our fears, fear of death, fear of the unknown. Monsters help us to see a life after death - faith. 

The internal life struggle of a monster is depicted in such movies as Frankenstein and the Picture of Dorian Gray, wherein the monsters christian function comes to fruition, albeit, an often times subliminal realization. As an example, vampires are regarded as a symbol for humanity seeking redemption while zombies serve as a symbol for grace. Moreover, monsters are liminal figures, which blur the boundary between life and death. The paradox associated with monsters and their function, lies in Christianity’s tendency to regard monsters as demonic figures, and yet, it is evident from the lecture that the function of monsters has Christian purposes or tendencies. 




Humanity’s fascination with monsters is an embodiment of mankind’s desire to seek redemption and to come to terms with, or believe in, an intangible life after death. Monsters can be regarded as a representation of a fallen humanity that ultimately points to our fragility and to an unknown God.

A Response to "Operation: Violence"

Link can be found here: http://chloesmc305.blogspot.ca/2012/03/operation-violence.html

In your blog you discuss the debate as to whether or not violence is natural or cultural. I completely agree with you with respect to your claim that video games are not the only source for causing violent behaviour. I feel that a violent side is not attributed to whether or not one would like to explore it but rather how one can control their violent urges, so to speak. When we become angry or frustrated and try to strangle the controller, we often here others say "relax...calm down". The ability to control our emotions determines whether or not we express ourselves through violent means. I also believe that people are not born as 'violent' beings but rather become violent or having violent tendencies because of "things that you experience outside of your video games". Having negative experiences with people around you or dramatic/traumatic life events can predispose people to express their frustration through violent means. A relevant and appropriate argument, which was proposed in class, involves this notion of catharsis, or the purging of negative emotions through the medium of the video game.

That being said, it is important to put video gaming in perspective, as it is just a game. To make an argument against Christians playing video games is similar to saying Christians are not allowed to watch violent movies or violent shows. Since we discussed the increased amount of violence in hockey two weeks ago, I presume that Christians will not be allowed to watched hockey every again.

It is important to consider video games for what they are - a source for entertainment. Although I am not much of a video gamer, I sometimes indulge in a bit of Call of Duty. The effectiveness, power, and appeal of video games lies in its ability not only to 'awe' the gamer but also to remove them from reality into another 'world'. Gamers can spend hours upon hours playing because they are essentially 'caught up' in the game. They are so immersed, captivated, and mesmerized that they fail to recognize how long they have been actually playing for.

Call of Duty: Christian Warfare 3

In last week's lecture we focussed on the topic of violence, gaming, and popular culture. The complexity of the intersection between Christianity, violence, and popular culture in video gaming was discussed as there have been groups of people who have held differing views on the subject. There have been groups who have called for the ban of video games, those who have promoted the replication of video games, and other groups who regard video games as a way of enticing gamers or youth into churches.

3 months ago, when I asked my 6-year old soccer players whom I coach on weekends what they got from Santa, the major answers were: Playstation, Xbox, Call of Duty 3, Battlefield, and Gears of War 3. It was at that moment that I was struck with a startling realization. I mean, I had expected answers such as: a new pair of socks, new hockey sticks or a set of hockey skates, or even a Maple Leafs jersey (a far stretch) because those were some of the gifts I had received at a young age - the socks were from my grandmother. What is startling is the fact that children as young as 6 years of age are already being exposed to the violence and brutality depicted in these games. I noticed as well that on the package of the actual game Call of Duty, it was rated as "M" for mature. Upon further inspection, I found that games that were rated "M" contained content that was suitable for persons ages 17 and older. These types of games contained 'intense violence, blood and gore'. If these rules and regulations were actually enforced, that would mean that my players would have to wait another 11 years to be able to play this game. Given the argument that violent video games cause for an increase tendency towards violence in reality, this situation becomes very problematic. Do we really want to expose young children to violence, brutality, and war at such a young age? The case can be made that not only are other media resources exposing children to the 'horrors' of this world but also that at some point we all have to face reality.

I also believe that video games that are themselves war-type games also undermine the reality of war and the fact that once you are killed, there are no extra lives or restart buttons. Children as young as 6 are playing within the comfort of their own home, not afraid of a grenade, a sniper on top of a roof, or an enemy encroaching from behind. It is just a game.

That being said, video games, such as Modern Warfare 3, do serve as a source for great entertainment. When regarded solely from an entertainment perspective, the sales of this particular game speaks volumes.