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?