Panel Q & A Forum for Minority Report

The film I investigated was Minority Report. My argument was that the modern technology in the film serves as a method of control over the body. The use of surveillance over society complicates the division between the freedom over one's body and one's predetermined destiny. I raised the argument that Precrime takes on a God-like power by changing destiny and that the film argues that humans have free will rather than a determined future.

Feel free to ask me questions!!

Prompt 12

My reaction to most of the violence in Videodrome is of disgust. I literally had to turn away. However, you can't help but look either. Violence is something in our society that has a negative connotation. Videodrome literally shows violence but it also uses it to transcend and work on people. The violence controls Max and Max uses it to control others. In our mainstream media, it is the norm not to show extreme violence, especially if it is real. I think that Cronenberg uses violence because it is something that usually isn't shown, its different, but also because its different it evokes a sense of shock and disgust from its viewers. I think his message to the audience is to parallel this disgust for violence with this disgust for technology.

When we think of a world of chaos, we think of a world of violence. People against each other causing death, disease and turmoil, is what I picture when I think of a world torn down by violence. In Videodrome, this is what technology gives us. It is infectious. Violence is powerful and people react powerfully to it. It makes people vigilant. In a world of violence, or in a world of technology, people have to constantly be on guard, watching their backs and anticipating what could happen. I think the violence in the film also evokes this from the viewers. The gruesomeness seems to get worse and worse, so the viewer anticipates it, making them more and more disgusted.

I think the use of violence in Videodrome focuses the argument of body and technology. It is showing the violence to the body that technology can cause. Whether its death, distortion, or even mentally effecting the body so that you cause violence to others. It is effective in supporting his argument about technology and effective in evoking response from the viewers.

Prompt 11

The movie I have been assigned is Minority Report, a Steven Spielberg film from 2002 that is set in 2054. It is based on the idea of a future system called Precrime. It is a special police department that stops murder crimes before they happen. They use three humans that they call "precogs," that can see the future. The are kept hooked up to a machine and given nutrients and electrodes. The are kept not too awake but not too deep asleep either. The images that they see are projected onto a screen in which John Anderton, the Precrime officer, can sort through in order to find clues where the crime is going to happen.
There are many relationships that we see in this future setting between the body and technology. Each human has a chip in their eye that can be scanned to identify them. This helps the government keep track of everyone. There are scanners at the entrances of every building and metro statements and along the streets so they can keep track of where everyone is. This plays on the idea of power and technology and how it can be used by certain people to control others.
The "precogs" that can tell the future are the result of human technology. They are children of drug addicts who were given all kinds of experimental treatment for their survival. So the film is making to argument that technology can change how our minds work.
The overall argument, however, is that despite what seems like a perfected system, because the fact that is human-run and operated, there is a flaw. That because humans are imperfect, the system can't be. Sometimes the "precogs" disagree, creating a minority report. And in the case of this movie, the officer who runs the precrime operations is actually accused of murder.
I see how this resembles Neuromancer in a lot of aspects, from small details to the overall argument that humans will always be limited by their bodies no matter how much technology intervenes.

Prompt 9

I think that the most interesting and provactive body we are exposed to in Neuromancer is Molly. It is a female body of both feminine sex appeal along with masculine attributes. Most other women in the book are "whores," however, Molly differs from this normative view of the female body. She is a tough working girl who can defend herself. She wears mostly black, masculine clothing with black boots. Both her mirrored eyes and the blades in her nails are body modifications that defend her and help make her stronger. For Molly, using the body as a way to get what you want and transcend normal limits is why body modification is important. Her mirrored eyes keep you from getting to see her emotion and getting inside her, which would make her more vulnerable to another. The blades are purely an alteration to her body to be a defense mechanism. She looks at the body as a way to gain power. Which is opposite of the way Case looks at the body. He looks at it as "meat." I think that since we do not have cyberspace in our world, we look at the body more like Molly does, as a way to empower oneself. Technology has a productive relationship with Molly's body. This is different from most bodies we've encountered in class so far. Most have used technology to modify one's body for a personal meaning or because it is a trend. Molly's is productive; it actually does something.

Prompt 7

I think that mainstream body modifications are subject to the same arguments Pitt makes just as much as radical body modifications. Any modification has intersubjective meaning, as Pitt describes it. It has the meaning behind why the person does it to themselves, and it is "read" by society and then defined by other individuals. There are political implications surrounding the normative body modifications because they are still making a statement to society whether it is accpeted as mainstream or not. When a person works out and eats healty in aims of staying thin, they are still judged by society for doing so. They are making the argument that they care about their body image and they want to fit a normative view of what the body should look like. One may argue that someone who does not make an effort to be thin and lets themselves be overweight is doing so to counter normative standards just like someone who radically modifies their bodies. Yet their are also people who simply do not fit into normative standards. This creates radical, and very political, ways in which people try to modify their bodies to fit these standards. Things like diet pills, stomach stapling, plastic and cosmetic surgery, hair dye, and tanning beds, can all be taken to radical levels and have extremely taboo context. This refers back to the idea that "natural" is beautiful. People are just as much judged for taking part in normative body modification because that means that they are not naturally beautiful. So I think all the things I listed as "mainstream" body modifications, with maybe the exception of exercise to stay thin, are not promoted but are more accepted because they are ways in which to fit the normative view of beauty.

Prompt 6

The formal writing that we are forced to partake in during our academic careers entails a taught structured prose that we learn through imitation. It is a standard way to learn to express oneself through writing that is accepted in the academic world. It teaches us to communicate in an effective manner. A manner in which has been established by academics before us. We learn how to do it by reading other academic prose, essays and arguments written by academics that make an argument about a particular topic. As students, we then imitate the methodology others have used to make an argument. Whether it is a research paper, a descriptive paper or an argumentative paper, the way we write and present them to our audience are the same. We begin using this type of writing in school as soon as we begin to write essays in the 4th grade, and continue to write this way through our college years in which prepare us for the professional world. Even in the professional world, we are expected to communicate in a professional manner, which I believe is modeled after the academic writing we learn.
Generally, besides in our college classrooms, we express ourselves and communicate everyday through non-written acts. Everything we do to modify ourselves is making an argument about who we are or want people to think about ourselves. How we dress, do our hair, accesorize and do our makeup make a statement. It fits us into a certain group which we identify with. Working out and staying fit makes an argument to others that we are healthy. Even daily hygenic acts, like we discussed, communicates that we care about our bodies or don't, like shaving. We also communicate who we are by what we do. All careers, jobs and hobbies have a stereotypical person which fits into each of these. A lawyer is thought to be very different than a teacher, or from a model, so on and so on. Someone who rock climbs is a certain person and someone who sews is a different person. Also, art, in all forms, is an act of expression. Painting, sculpture, music, acting, dancing, photography, and many more are different acts we use to express ourselves through. In this way, especially, we take authorship and control.
However, whatever way in which you express yourself or make an argument through, there is a limit to how you can do it. A person can only do so much to themselves. Body modifciation can only go so far until it becomes harmful. Body modification can only break the norm so long until it becomes so popular that it is the normal trend. As Pitts argues, no matter what you do and the meaning that it has to you or you are trying to portray, it is limited by societies interpretation. It is intersubjective, she says, meaning you do not ever have complete control because it will be washed out by society. I agree with this argument. There will always be a limit to everything you do as long as you live within society and if you chose to live outside society than you are not making an argument to anyone.

Prompt 5

These two very different cultural artifacts give two different views of body modification. The National Geographic "Tattoos, piercings, & body markings" Gallery documents both traditional and modern primitivism as a cultural art that serves a particular role and/or meaning. The argument that this gallery makes is that body modifications are unique and extreme. It argues that is is against the norm for mainstream Western cultures besides the leading modern primitives yet a deeply historical norm for many other cultures across the world, including Africa and the South Pacific. It argues that this act of body modification needs to be preserved because of its cultural significance. The argument it makes about the body is that it is a medium in which one uses to express things about oneself. Things like status, beliefs, identity, beauty and faith.
The second cultural artifact, the NPR program, Marketplace's "Inc.'s a bit more at ease with ink," makes the argument that body modification has been increasingly incorporated into mainstream society. This in turn has made it more acceptable and part of the norm. Because of the popularity of tatooing, more people get them for no particular reason. It makes the argument that the body is a means in which one expresses their identity and portrays status and self-worth in a professional environment.
My own view point falls somewhere in between these two arguments. I understand the historical significance of modifications done by primitive societies because of their meaning and tradition. However, I do not understand modern primitivism. I do not believe that Westernized populations who partake in modern primitivism are making arguments to society. I do, however, believe that the body is a means to represent oneself to society, and when one modifies their bodies to extremity it is in means of resisting the cultural norm.

Short Writing Assignment 2

Curtis Hopi
Originally uploaded by jilliansayre

The photo I have chosen by Edward Curtis is entitled Hopi. I am assuming that this is the name of the Indian tribe that the subjects in the photograph are from. The genre is the labor of an old Indian tribe. The medium is a non-colored photograph. The historical context that I can gain from this photograph is that because of the medium we know that it had to have been taken in at least the early 20th century. This means that it is the much later part of the Native American era, yet we see that their civilization has not advanced itself to the times. The subject of the photograph is four Hopi Indian women. They are located inside some type of working house. It looks like a very small space and probably made out of some type of adobe or clay. There are tools or various equipments hanging in the background, implying that the subjects are not inside a home. The arrangement of the women is all four equal to each other in a single line. This shows them as all from the same caste; not one is more important than the other. They are completing some kind of task. They each have their own defined space in which they are rolling something. In front of them it looks like there is a bowl of maybe some kind of grain. Maybe they are rolling out dough.
Never the less, the women are being displayed as an inferior body. They are all on their knees and looking down, a clear symbol of submissiveness. There is no distinction between them showing a lack of individuality. They are all wearing the same clothes, which are very simple and plain. It looks like a robe with a shawl over their shoulders. However, they are completely covered, something different than what we saw with the early Native Americans. Perhaps, this was because over time the influence of the Europeans showed them it was right to cover one’s body. Their hair is also identical. It is parted down the middle with two twisted buns, one on each side of their head. Perhaps since they are working they put their hair back as to not get in the way of their work.

Prompt 3

The main difference that I find when comparing the two William Penn paintings are the different genres. They are telling the same exact story and have two very different styles. The use of light, colors, people and details suggest different genres. The first painting by Edward Hicks was painted almost 100 years after the second painting. It has more of a folklore genre. It has deep, richer colors and the details are less defined and are more abstract. The bodies and faces are bigger and less real looking. The second painting by Benjamin West is more Romantic. The coloring is lighter and the light is brighter. There is more detail to the picture. The people are more real looking. It has the romantic haziness to it.
The two paintings are also flipped in arrangement. As you look from left to right, the first painting has the Native Americans first, followed by the Americans and then the open ocean. The second painting is the opposite with the ocean, then the Americans, and lastly the Native Americans. The first painting may show the Native Americans importance by showing them first. However, we also get a sense that they are being confined, or trapped, into the corner of the painting. The second painting shows the Native Americans as more free.
Some common things that the two paintings have are the subjects. In both we have the Native Americans and white Americans standing opposite of each other with a few of each sitting or kneeling to the other. We also have the subject of William Penn as a central figure, standing with open arms to the Natives. There is also the ocean in the background and other, non-central Native Americans and white American settlers on the sides and in the background. The both show the vulnerability of the Native Americans by painting them naked versus the fully clothed white Americans. We also see the Native American woman with the child in each painting perhaps to also show the vulnerability of the Natives in their own home land.

Prompt 2

The “New World Body” was one that was very different from what the Europeans had ever seen before. Therefore, because of their curiosity and at times disgust, the settlers wrote about their first accounts with these bodies. Just because they were different, the “New World Body” was strange. The Europeans saw them as uncivilized savages. John Lawson described them as being strange, disproportionate, poor and lazy. They do not have the material status or technology that the Europeans do. They don’t dress lavishly with ornamentation or shave their beards and cut their hair. They do not have the weaponry that the Europeans do; therefore, to the Europeans they are poor and lazy. According to Lawson, not only do the Europeans think they are the superior race, but the Native Americans do as well. He says it esteems them to have a white man’s child. The “New World Body” is definitely a gendered body. The women are treated as objects to the men and are expected to give their bodies up to them. Lawson accounts on how the women offer themselves to the European men as if it were expected, something the white men were not used to.
George Shelvocke described the “New World Body” as one that comes in large numbers. He says they are “quite naked”, had a “savage appearance” and were “wild” (p.338-339). William Bartram compares his encounter with a Seminole Indian with his encounter with an alligator. This implies the “New World Body” to be animal-like and a predator. They also show to be violent bodies in Samuel Hearne’s account of the savage massacre that he witnessed where they even sexually abused women’s dead bodies.
So overall, the “New World Body,” as described in the Travel Writings by white Europeans, was not normative. The European body is the right body; it is the normal body and powerful body. The images on the map do not seem to be similar to my definition of the “New World Body.” They do not have to physical appearance of Native Americans. I have trouble being able to tell if they are supposed to be Native Americans or Europeans in some of the pictures. I think the bodies are described differently in that they are clothed more with more ornamentation and weapons, and they don’t seem to be very savage or wild.

Prompt 1: The Body

I am exposed to all sorts of bodies of different shapes and sizes and thanks to the media we are all exposed to images and/or portrayals of bodies from every different segment of the population. The main body that I am exposed to in my world is that of the college-aged student. College students are mostly young, they don’t have to follow a certain uniform, and amongst them there are many different segments that identify with each other. Specifically, I am exposed to the body of the sorority girl. I am in a sorority and I live in my sorority house with 45 other girls who are my age and look and dress just like me. This body generally cares about how it is presented. Girls compare their bodies to everyone else’s. How fit their bodies are shape how well they are liked or accepted. They use material things to fit the norm and present themselves in a certain way.
The body functions as a canvas that we use to come across the way we want to others. We dress it up, accessorize it, put stuff on it (permanently and not), modify it and make it smell a certain way. We may do these things to our bodies because we simply like them. However, we also do them to present our identity to others or how we want others to see us. We know that we read people by their bodies, their body language and what they do to their bodies. Therefore, we do certain things knowing others are judging us. Some may argue there are people who simply do not care if they are judged by others and will not do things to alter their bodies in any way just for the way others see them. I would agree with this, however, they are still conscience of the things they do or do not do for their bodies and it is for some reason. Also, in the particular environment that I am exposed to, the bodies around me do care. There is also the point that if a body takes the time to present itself in a particular way, say in getting dressed up and putting makeup on, you care too much about how others perceive you and would be considered conceited by your peers.
On a regular basis, the student body may go to class not bathed and unpolished, wearing whatever they may feel like just to be comfortable. In our environment of higher education, we do not put an importance on body image. You generally are not judged on how you interact with others, sell yourself, etc. In the real world you have to dress and present yourself a certain way in order to give a good impression. The body in higher education is one who is humbled in the learning process, not yet having to get ahead in the world by having to fit a certain mold. And of course, there our always exceptions to this.