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.

A Response to Rachel’s Post – The Nation’s Weekly Mass: Hockey Night in Canada

http://gospelaccordingtobuddychrist.blogspot.ca/2012/03/nations-weekly-mass-hockey-night-in.html

Rachel argues that outside the relationship between economics of sport and religiosity, sport in a sense, serves to recreate “religious experiences” and teaches “religious values”. The economics of sport in a sense taints the positive benefits that sport can offer to the player and to the greater community. I agree that sport can function to teach children and youth basic ‘life’ skills and that sport has positive benefits with regards to teaching religious values and recreating religious experiences. I am also a strong supporter of sport and the benefits it has not only in helping children around the world but also in helping the community that supports a particular team.

You mentioned the economics in professional sport, but there are also other examples of the economic impact in other areas of sport. Not only have the economics of sport infiltrated the professional realm, but also over the years, it has increasingly crept into the realm of amateur sport, specifically the NCAA. The beauty of amateur sport is that it celebrates the purity of sport – sport without a price tag or a salary. It is the celebration of athletic talent and of athletic quality. There are have been numerous cases of professional teams bribing college players and universities bribing high school students with monetary and other incentives for recruiting purposes. The notion of the “commodification of sport amateurism” is an interesting topic that is currently being discussed and debated.

That being said, I would like to play devil’s advocate, and say that despite its positive benefits, the tendency for fans and players to regard sport, as religion, is a cause for increased violence, both on and off the field of play. For Canadians, hockey is ‘our game’, ‘a way of life’, and a ‘religion’. For Europeans, the same can be said for soccer. However, are fans taking the game too seriously? I mean, it is just a game, right? I feel that sometimes fans and players lose sight of the fact that sport is ‘just a game’. We see evidence of fans taking the game too seriously in Canada, for example, with the notorious Vancouver riot - estimated damages were roughly 4.2 million dollars. Riots, brutality, and even death, are a common occurrence in Europe and in parts of South America after soccer matches. The show “Football Factories” strictly deals with a host and his cameraman as they travel and document soccer violence in some of the most hostile stadiums in the world. Why so much violence? Soccer fans consider their team and the sport of soccer to be religion/having religious qualities, which allow them to engage in and feel ‘religious’ emotions.         

The Normalization of Violence in Hockey - What Would Jesus Do?

Pay close attention to the reactions of the fans as well as the commentators:

The Setting

 Age 14… playing for the Meadowvale Mohawks Single ‘A’ Hockey Team… facing the Applewood Cree in a regular season game… down 4-0…

The Situation

A player on the opposing team is unhappy with one of my hits from the previous period and decides he wants to drop the gloves.

Note: Fighting at his age is prohibited. Also note that we are wearing full metal cages.

This opposing player drops his stick and takes his gloves while proceeding to skate towards me. I see him coming. Part of me laughs – size and strength are not in his favour – and he is attempting to strike my metal cage with his bare hands (definitely not a good move). Another part of me thinks, “we’re down 4-0, what have I got to lose?” – nothing ...

And so he swings wildly and misses. I drop my stick but keep my gloves on, knowing full well the pain of hitting his metal cage with my bare hand… I counter with a straight right-hand that makes a flush contact with the middle of his cage, putting him flat on his back and in tears…

The Consequence

I am immediately ejected from the game and spend the rest of the third period in the change room, waiting for my teammates and my coaches to arrive. It was the longest 10 minutes of my life as I questioned my actions and subsequently the repercussions. What will the players think? What will the coaches do? Am I off the team? What will my dad say to me? To my amazement, I am praised by my coaches for “sticking up for the team”. The players give me “high-fives” and laugh about the incident.

Now watch this youtube clip (interesting to note that it has over 5 million views):

Part of me finds it amusing – there is obviously a dialogue between the two players – an expression of displeasure regarding the hit and an attempt to provoke the ‘dropping of the gloves’. The speed at which the young lad drops his stick and removes his gloves is almost identical to that of an NHL player. Obviously, the other player is reluctant to do the same, but like me, he too decides to keep his gloves on (smart move). The youtube video identifies the two players to be 6 years old - this is the part I find somewhat shocking in light of last week’s lecture regarding the normalization of violence in sport, specifically hockey.

Players, at a very raw and early age, are beginning to adopt aspects of the ‘culture’ of hockey that is violence and fighting. One of the interesting points I took from lecture was the fact that the ‘theologizing’ of sport ultimately results in the normalization or valorization of pain and self-inflicting violence. The mixing of moral value with the commodification of professional sports can lead into dangerous territory as recently witnessed with the increase of violence in sport today. In a book written by Kevin Young and Philip White (2007) entitled Sport and Gender in Canada, a claim is made that Western Canada is currently suffering from a ‘crisis of masculinity’ stemming from “the disparity between the masculine traits they [men] are expected and encouraged to uphold …and the social realities of their everyday lives” (p.219). Moreover, decisions are made with a profit-driven intention of “giving the audiences what they want by providing the most appealing coverage…integrally related to the promotion of masculinist, as well as nationalistic, discourses” (p.214). Young and White believe that current players are adopting what they call ‘dangerous masculinities’ that result from learned behaviours and involve risk-taking, neglect for one’s health, and aggressive practices. Given the big business of sport, it is important to consider that these ‘masculinities’ are socially constructed as forms of entertainment to sell a particular product. As evidenced from Young and White, men are more susceptible to sports injury than women, have increased spinal injuries, and outnumber injured girls/women at all age levels. Failure of athletes to uphold these masculine hegemonic values results in social stigma, or the process of negative labelling - players are branded as being "soft"

So do we need fighting/violence in hockey? If fans truly love the sport, then the elimination of something that causes so much damage should not be a problem, right? Now ask that same question to the owners of NHL teams or to the top executives of the league. Somewhere in their answer you might find the phrase "but it serves as a selling point for our business... fans pay money to see violent behaviours on the ice". Why is there no fighting or hitting in the NHL All-Star Game that attracts millions of fans worldwide? According to the opinionated and controversial Don Cherry, fighting protects the talented players from getting hurt as evidenced in this youtube video:

Despite the chivalry that is evidenced in this next youtube clip at approximately 0:43 and onward, I feel that there is no need for fighting in hockey.

   

A Response to Estela’s “Faith is not a genre”

Link can be found here: http://jesusandpals-smc.blogspot.com/2012/03/faith-is-not-genre.html

In keeping with your hip-hop/rap theme, I would also like to propose another Christian artist that goes by the name of KJ-52. Originally, I was going to write a blog on a controversial rapper whose actions and lyrics were contradictory to his beliefs and religion but I ended up stumbling upon this man. On his website he states, “Like the society it mirrors, the music industry is hobbling in the wake of technological flux, economic freefall, and massive uncertainty”. KJ-52 is a Christian rapper from Tampa, Florida and was most remembered for his song entitled “Dear Slim” which was dedicated to Eminem after he wrote the song “Stan”. KJ-52 was often regarded as the ‘Christian counterpart’ to Eminem but his song “Dear Slim” was rated as number 26 on the “Top 40 Worst Moments in Hip Hop”.

That all aside, KJ-52’s song is a powerful appeal, wherein he draws parallels between himself and Eminem. He says, “See I could relate to you cause son I'm about as old as you see we both know what it's like just to be growing up to be in a neighborhood when you's the only one and only kid that's white or to get booed when you on the mic just because your skin is light”.

Like the music video “Stan”, KJ-52 is also writing a letter to Eminem but for very different reasons. In reading the lyrics I feel as if KJ-52 is, in a sense, trying to get Eminem to realize the gravity of his lyrics and the affects they have on his listeners and fans, some of who are children. Later on in the song, he questions the sincerity of Eminem’s lyrics and asks him if his lyrical content is just to generate profit for record companies: You ever stop to think about the millions you influence or is it just irrelevant is it true life you telling it or just the way for some record companies sellin it.

I feel that the fact that KJ-52’s song and this controversy generated such negative criticism is an example of the power and function that popular culture has in creating social boundaries (as outlined by Dustin Kidd). I believe that, in this case, we have one genre but two faiths. One is rejected and the other is supported. In your blog you mentioned that the “way in which faith is portrayed with social realities in Hip Hop is far complex and dense”. In this particular example, I feel that faith is portrayed in a negative light given such strong negative criticism, as mentioned before. This controversy ultimately highlights the tension as well as the clash of beliefs and values between popular music and 'contemporary christian music'.

Below are the lyrics for “Dear Slim” as well as the music videos for both KJ-52 and Eminem. I have highlighted in bold some of the lyrics that I find rather interesting.

Dear Slim I never wrote you or been callin

My name ain't Stan son, nah we've never met and

My name's KJ let me begin by introducing now

Myself to you and these very reasons I'll be writin

Why I took the time, the who what where and why and

The purpose of my verse, the reasons I'm reciting

What I hope your learnin from the truth I pray your finding

And every word I'm writin down upon the dotted lines and

See I heard ya first album, was called Infinite

I shook my head cause nowadays you soundin different

What drove ya take your whole persona and be flippin it now

What makes a man totally change see I ain't getting it

See was you sick of getting booed when you was rippin it

And sick of never havin dough and you your wanted to put an end to it

What good's all kinds of dough

Plus all kinds of flow

To gain a world of fans but suffer the loss of soul

Dear Slim I never wrote you or been calling

This is my 2nd letter cause see son I gots a real problem

It's that to you that I'm always catching these comparisons

And after shows I got these people coming up to me sayin

You sound like Slim Shady son you sound like Eminem

And I be like now really man, do I gots to go through this again

See I used to get mad and sick of people saying that

Till at this one show this one day I met this one cat

He told me how he used to listen to you but now he listens to me

Had your LP but threw it out and bought my CD

I'm like for real he's like yeah he said my music made a difference

It got him away from all your words and images

I gotta mention this, now what about the effects you have on kids

You ever stop to think about the millions you influence

Or is it just irrelevant is it true life you telling it

Or just the way for some record companies sellin it

The only thing we got in common is our melanin

Or lack of it but anyway now this is what I'm sayin

It's for you that I'm on my knees now daily prayin

Prayin that God opens your eyes now to what I'm relayin

Now I'm praying that it's your heart that will soon be changing

Prayin one day that you'll be calling upon His name and

But anyway I'm signin off now don't keep me waitin

This is KJ another cat just trying to make it

Dear Slim I heard about the stuff you's going through

See I could relate to you cause son I'm about as old as you

See we both know what it's like just to be growing up to be in a neighborhood

When you's the only one and only kid that's white

Or to get booed when you on the mic just because your skin is light

It ain't right but sometimes you know that's life

But really tell me what you do

You just push on with hopes on that someday you'll put on your crew

I hope you understand that I ain't even dissin you

And even though its a song you'll probably never listen to

See what I send to you is this

Is that a life without Christ is just a life that is never fixed

Hope you remember this now a few sentences

About a living God who loves you and plus forgives

And I'll be praying for your ex-wife and plus your kid

It's hard to live in a world as crazy as this one is

And even though now it really might sound redundant

God's got mad love for you up in a mad abundance

You'll sell a couple mill I'll probably sell a couple hundred

There's more to life then selling records and just getting blunted

But anyway that's really all I gots to say

Just another word from an MC now around the way

Maybe some day we meet each other in some way

Till then one love one God one way   

"Stan" by Eminem

A Personal Account of Sport and Muscular Christianity

            After having read the two articles involving violence in hockey and the religious experience of Southern College Football, I felt compelled to offer an unorthodox version of an ‘academic’ blog. I have decided to combine both articles and apply them to my personal experiences as a former semi-professional soccer player in Canada and my experience playing in Europe. Hopefully, this will be an appropriate segue into the topic of Sports and Muscular Christianity for our next lecture.

            Last year, after making the decision to end my playing career, I was unexpectedly asked: What were your earliest childhood memories? My response was picking as many dandelions as possible during one of my first ever soccer games to give to my mother. My dream of being the world’s greatest dandelion-picking soccer player was abruptly ended when I discovered all 20+ beautifully handpicked dandelions in the garbage two days later (not sure if I will ever forgive my mother for that).

            Now, where to begin? In retrospect, it could be said that soccer constituted my life. For 18 years, give or take, my life involved family/friends, church, and soccer. As a semi-professional player, we were paid $300 for a win, $200 for a tie, and $50 for a loss. Training was 6-days a week, with pre-season workouts occurring twice a day. Competition to crack the starting 11 was fierce and often times violent as the salaries for bench players were drastically reduced as compared to the aforementioned standard pay. We (myself including) would undergo extraordinary physical pain and would sacrifice our bodies in order to achieve success, as in winning. This was our mindset. As Trothen (2009) describes, from the perspective of the coaching staff, we were regarded as commodities and our talents were commodified to achieve production. Concussions from head butts, a kick to the face, or an elbow, were hidden from therapists and painkillers were routinely used to conceal injuries from broken ribs to sprained/fractured ankles to missing teeth; all of this done out of fear of losing our starting spot and, ultimately, to win. As teammates, our actions to conceal injuries etc. were done out of pressure and as a means to uphold rigid masculine ideologies that were socially constructed and that dominated the typical male athlete. Our coaches glorified “self-sacrifice and pain and suffering” found in traditional atonement theories (Trothen, 2009). This sounds really similar to hockey right? I know! However, when you’ve sacrificed a great portion of your personal life to play an elite sport, the end justifies the means, to some extent.

            I was someone’s teammate, a member of a family! I spent more time with my ‘soccer family’ than I did with my own ‘real’ family. From 5-hour road trips on buses, to plane rides, to sharing rooms, we were able to establish an everlasting bond, a friendship. Unlike the article written by Bain-Selbo (2008) I was able to establish an ‘emotional bond’ with soccer, not as a fan, but as a player. Words used in his article such as ‘friendship’, ‘community’, ‘love’, and ‘hope’ are all words that I can appropriate to my experiences with soccer. I have certainly experienced Bain-Selbo’s outlined emotions (joy, passion, and intensity) that “arise typically in religious contexts” (2008). As a player in Northern France, it was mandatory to undergo mental training sessions with a mental training coach (sports psychologist). We learned how to deal with setbacks, adversity, and the anger/outrage that builds when an opposing player or fan makes a racist or rude remark to you or your fellow teammate (these things do happen). The phrase “fire in your heart…ice in you head’ was something I will never forget and, for me, is the epitome of mental fortitude. I believe that my ‘religious experiences’ associated with soccer, thus, came as a result of my ability to solely immerse myself in the game and not get carried away or distracted by external events. I was 100% IN the game to the point where I was able to forget about everything and anything outside of the soccer pitch, including my own personal life. I experienced, what Csikzentmihalyi (in Bain-Selbo, 2008) calls ‘flow’. Soccer provided me “with a sense of belonging and an opportunity to express powerful emotions” (Edwards as cited in Bain-Selbo, 2008, 242).                   

OMG…J-BEEBS

The first thing I said when I walked into my house after class today was a simple question directed towards my little 17 year-old sister: What do you think of Justin Bieber? In a high-pitched irritating voice, the response was simple…I LOVE HIM! As a 23 year-old, I would like to state that my interest in Justin Bieber and his music is equivalent to that of my profound and ardent interest in watching fresh paint dry on a wall or listening to my grandmother lecture me on why I am not eating her food (even when I repeatedly tell her that I just ate 3 meals before coming to her house – it’s a European thing and I love her). I’m more of a mix of Calvin Harris, Avicii, and Kaskade with Foster the People, the Black Keys, and Mumford and Sons type of person. 

For those who are offended, my apologies – but this IS a blog

Despite my opinion, Justin Bieber currently has 17,847,094 followers on the social network Twitter (I’m not one of them…but you CAN follow me @DannyyyyG). His My World album went platinum only 3 months after it was released and in 2011, Justin Bieber and Lady Gaga were rated as the two most charitable celebrities (Beebs came first). He has dedicated an inordinate amount of time towards supporting charities and charitable events, including charitable concerts and appearances. His work should be praised!?

One of the topics for discussion in today’s lecture involved pop music figures and the difficulty of being able to regard their actions and words as sincere and authentic. An example regarding this topic of discussion was mentioned at the end of class involving the Jonas Brothers and their purity rings – can we really believe that they will abstain from sexual intercourse before marriage? Then it dawned on me – what about Tim Tebow’s remarks regarding his virginity. Do we believe/trust Tebow more than we do the Jonas Brothers? Or Bieber’s/Lady Gaga’s actions as being sincere? 

I feel that the reason why society finds it difficult to acknowledge the sincerity of pop music figures is because there is a fundamental difference between how we perceive the controversial values inherent in the entertainment industry and the so-called ‘redeeming’ qualities of the athlete. Documentaries and interviews on athletes, especially with boxers, often times reveal a troubled or difficult childhood. The athlete emphasizes and attributes qualities such as hard work, dedication, sacrifice, and discipline to their ability succeed in life and in their respective sport. I believe that these ‘life qualities’ are what society admires and ultimately adopts. The NBA and the NFL all donate to charities and a majority of players from these respective leagues have their own charities as well. That being said, let’s not forget about the Tiger Woods saga or should I say scandal! Maybe society is just inherently cynical and questions the altruistic actions of all groups. Perhaps this is not specific to the music industry. Were people cynical when pop culture figures performed charitable work or donated sums of money 15-20 years ago or is this a recent trend?

Ps. In the time I took to write this blog, Justin Bieber gained 2,102 more followers on Twitter.

Response to "Jeremy Lin, Saviour"

Besides basketball, there are other sports in which athletes refer to God. As an example, a soccer version of a Jeremy Lin is that of Ricardo Izecson dos Santos Leite, also commonly known as Kaka. A devout Evangelical Christian, Kaka is considered one of the greatest Brazilian soccer players to play the beautiful game. What makes him a topic for discussion in this course you ask? The same reason why Jeremy Lin is being discussed; his public display of faith to God as well as his role as a ‘Saviour’ for his team. In his speech after winning the Player of the Year Award in 2007, Kaka quoted the Bible. After the 2002 World Cup, Kaka removed his jersey to reveal the words “I Belong To Jesus” inscribed on his t-shirt. Moreover, after a near-death experience, Kaka attributed his recovery to God saying, “It was a moment of spiritual growth with God…I always read the Bible to pass the time…then I began to have experiences with God myself" (CHAMPIONS Magazine). Given that he has claimed to have had experiences with God and is of the most humble players in the world, Kaka embodies Kozlovic’s characteristics of ‘simplicity’ and ‘divinely sourced’ as a Christ-figure.

But do we need to “keep religion out” of sport or football? (in the case of the New York Times blog below) is a question that is debatable. Is there a place for religion in sport? Should players keep their religious comments/beliefs to themselves? Why is it that athletes tend to mention God when they win but not when they lose? It’s interesting to note that both Jeremy Lin and Kaka are Evangelical Christians and are, to some extent, considered ‘Saviours’ for their respective teams. 

http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/tim-tebow-and-keeping-religion-out-of-football/

  

  

Silence is golden...television shows and their message

Bernard Cornwell, a British author, once said that television is a young person’s medium. I remember the days of Alvin and the Chipmunks, The Adventures of Tintin, Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, The Three Stooges, The Magic School Bus, Popeye the Sailor Man, as well as the original Batman television series starring Adam West and Burt Ward. I grew up watching these shows religiously and, in a sense, these shows were either a part of my childhood or early teen years. As a child, for some strange reason I believed that spinach would give me massive biceps. I related to certain characters, while trying to imitate others. In a sense, I lived vicariously through the characters in the shows I followed.

The more I contemplate Cornwell’s aforementioned quote in light of these shows and others, the more I have come to the obvious realization that television, apart from serving certain educational purposes, has introduced me to and has exposed me to society and the world around me. During Tuesday’s lecture, it was argued that at different times in one’s life the metaphors that are associated with television, as outlined in article written by Dettweiler and Taylor, change. I would argue that not only have the metaphors changed but so too has the content of the shows. In certain examples, the content not only serves as the antithesis to common ways of behaving and living but also serves to distort and obscure what is defined and/or meant by proper conduct.

In lecture we discussed how Christians were being represented in narrative television and in reality shows, but what about the representation of Christian values? Even if you want to disregard religious values, what about a basic conduct of living and a sense of morality i.e. respect for yourself and others as well as right versus wrong? I feel that certain sitcoms and televisions shows are creating a false sense of living and a misrepresentation of proper/normal behaviours. As an example, the sitcom Entourage is one particular television show that was extremely appealing and popular. The notion that viewers live vicariously through their favourite television actors and, in turn, adopt their particular traits, becomes troublesome when you look at how Ari Gold (the main character) treats women, his assistant, and his employees. His behaviour is rude, chauvinistic, and abhorrent but somehow attractive! Two and a half men is another example of a sitcom with controversial messages but we all know about that…

A Response to Felicia P’s Post entitled “Lil Wayne a Christ Figure?”

Felicia, you took a very interesting approach in dealing with Christ figures by applying what we learned in lecture to a music video in Lil Wayne. Right off the start, you make an interesting observation by noting that the video begins with a shot of Lil Wayne’s eyelids with “Fear God” across both eyes. This is reminiscent of numerous Bible passages that deal with ‘fearing God’ as Deuteronomy 6:13 says, “The Lord your God you shall fear; him you shall serve...”. Fear of God for the non-believer could mean fear of the final judgment or of eternal condemnation (eternal separation from God). For the believer, on the other hand, fear of the Lord involves a sense of reverence or respect towards God.

In watching the music video in its entirety and reading the lyrics that are ascribed to both Lil Wayne and Bruno Mars, it can almost be argued that the video depicts a relationship and an internal struggle between a believer and God. Initially, Lil Wayne could represent God while Bruno Mars could represent the believer. For me, the video is a dialogue between the two. I believe that the video was called “Mirror” to show that through faith in God, people can come to know and see who they truly are inside of themselves. Bruno Mars says, “…through my rise and fall, you’ve been my only friend, you told me that they can, understand the man I am, so why are we, here, talking to each other again”. For me, this represents a believer living in the world of popular culture who seems to be, in some respects, segregated because of his religious beliefs. To this, Lil Wayne responds by saying “…but I’m with you when you’re all alone…”.

Later on in the video, Lil Wayne says, “…I see the change, and I see the message”. This could, in a sense, parallel the Garden of Gethsemane scene, wherein Jesus comes to terms with God’s plan for salvation and what Jesus must do in order to fulfill God’s will.

I believe that the paint that is prevalent throughout the video could be interpreted as representing the weakening of the believer’s faith and overall mindset. We see that over the course of the video, the paint gradually begins to cover the entire “mirror”. This could represent popular culture’s effect as serving to morally deprive the human soul. Living in a materialistically-driven world, the believer sees himself/herself as being confused, morally weakened, and unsure of whom he/she is or what he/she believes in. 

Harry Potter: A Modern Christ-figure

Tuesday’s lecture revolved around the topic of Jesus films and Christ figures. Of particular interest was Kozlovic’s article entitled The Structural Characteristics of the Cinematic Christ-figure, who claimed, “the Christ-figure film is a legitimate pop culture phenomenon” (2004, p.1). In addition, the distinction was made between the two modes of Christic representation: the Saviour mode and the redeemer mode. The character of Harry Potter stands out, for me, as a Christ-figure that has taken popular culture by storm. Based on the definitions of the two modes of Christic representation, it can be argued that Harry Potter both embodies the Saviour as well as the redeemer through his actions and what he represents in the story. In the novels, it is clear that Harry Potter both leads and saves ‘his people’ from destruction. Whether or not he goes about his role as Saviour through the use of violence is open to interpretation; the wizardry battle scenes prevalent throughout the series can be interpreted as being, to some degree, violent. It is also quite clear that Harry Potter functions as a redeemer through his death.

There is also an underlying tension prevalent in the novel between innocence versus maturity. Blurred and distorted at the beginning of the series, this tension between innocence and maturity is finally made clear when Harry comes to terms with the fact that he must sacrifice himself out of love. Applying the question why do we need a Christ-figure? within the context of this series, it could be said Harry Potter the Christ-figure, serves to connect the story to a greater narrative, that of the story of Christ. It also serves to add appeal as a selling point.

As the Youtube clip below argues, the Harry Potter series contain numerous Christ-elements as well as common Christian themes, such as love, sacrifice, and resurrection, that serve to connect Harry as a Christ-figure. 

Response to Jessica’s post entitled “Sex sells but not for me”

Jessica, your post brought up some very interesting points as well as potential concerns for the future. In retrospect, I too remember the craze and the overwhelming impatience in getting my first Tamagotchi as well as other toys such as mini sticks, crazy bones, and pogs. I certainly know that I have left out several crucial toys that I loved with a passion and for that I apologize… (Inserting a brief moment of nostalgia here)…. Moving on.

With age and maturity, our desire for specific objects and/or wants have changed and developed to comply with the norms of our social category. In reading your post, I was able to summarize your argument within two major subjects: norm production through advertising and the notion of ‘perpetual dissatisfaction’.

As you mentioned in your article, advertisements ultimately create the “unattainable body image (available through airbrushing and Photoshop)”. You also mentioned that our perception of the ‘norm’, with respect to body image, is beginning to be perceived by younger and younger age groups. It has almost come to the point where children are born into a world where the norm of aesthetics is severely distorted. There seems to be a gradual shift away from focusing on the ‘inside’, so to speak, of a person and Mary Jo Leddy’s notion of ‘perpetual dissatisfaction’ supports this point. 


The notion of ‘perpetual dissatisfaction’, in Mary Jo Leddy’s book entitled Radical Gratitude, ultimately proposes that society, specifically through advertisements and media, create an artificial and continual ‘craving’ for material goods. It involves an uncontrollable pursuit of material goods, ultimately creating a society in which its citizens are held captive. As you mentioned in your article regarding advertisement’s ability to “employ the religious notion of desire”, I believe that advertising is a form of seduction, whereby advertisers, who promote and campaign a specific object, appeal not to its basic function, but to an idealistic and often delusional reality. In commenting on your question “whatever happened to loving and respecting the body God blessed you with?” I would go so far as to say that materialism morally deprives the developed society. Moreover, the means through which materialism is achieved and its effects neglect spiritual and moral values. 

The Beauty of Advertising

It has been said that on average, people in modern society are exposed to roughly 3,000 advertisements over the course of a 24-hour time frame. At first, this might seem somewhat shocking, even absurd, but if you pause and think about, it’s true! We live in a society dominated by images and videos of everything from underwear to cars. Pretty much every aspect of our lives can be advertised in some way, shape, or form. An article written by Margaret Duncan entitled Sports Photographs and Sexual Difference: Images of Women and Men in the 1984 and 1988 Olympic Games provided an in-depth analysis and critique on the inner workings of the making of sports photographs. Duncan mentions that the photographs are produced in a way that projects a story, which we, as the consumers, read. More importantly, Duncan believes that photographs are “subjected to artificial processes and social uses that make them as much interpretations of reality as any other visual medium” (1990, 23). What makes a photograph effective is its ability to serve as a commodity. For Duncan, photographs are “objects of consumption in several senses” (1990, 24). The notion of ‘pornography’ as a description of photographic advertisements is echoed both in Duncan’s article as well as in this week’s reading entitled Consuming Faith: Advertising, the Pornographic Gaze and Religious Desire. In this article Santana and Erickson claim that the culture of consumerism “readily yields to the pornographic gaze and its power to seduce buyers” (2008, 51). As an example, the body positions, facial expressions, and emotional displays of women are depicted in often-sexual ways in order to achieve a desired look that will ultimately entice the consumer. As mentioned in lecture, advertising is fundamentally rooted in stimulating desire for commodities in order to sell a particular product. In this case, the objective of stimulating desire and selling their product leads advertisers to create unrealistic images in order to attract the consumer’s desire. This becomes problematic given that the “pervasive use of women as commodified sexual objects in advertisements” (Santana and Erickson 2008, 62) is so widespread in our society. Should advertising agencies be penalized for using ‘pornographic’ advertisements? Are these advertisements ultimately perpetuating a kind of gender norm that strictly regard women as commodities to be used only for personal benefits or satisfaction? Moreover, does advertising ‘distort our perception of beauty’ as exclaimed in the Dove campaign below?