Final Reflection

First of all, I am very sad to see this class end. 

What I will miss most about the Culture of Fear course are the discussions we had as a class every Monday. It was completely content-driven, and provided ample room for differing opinions which were inevitable with the material at hand.

We examined the themes of our readings, how those themes affected us personally, and what it meant for the central idea of the course: examining the prevalence of messages of terror in the mass media. Many classes and discussions stick out in my mind-- any time we talked about 9/11 I always learned something new or gained a fresh perspective I hadn't thought about before. 

I was eleven years old when the World Trade Centers went down, and my parents comforted me as best as they could. They assured me that I was safe, cared for, and everything was going to be okay. Because I was so young and naive, I was not able to grasp the magnitude of the situation. Interestingly enough, it is only while watching the President speak on TV that I started to get nervous. Really nervous. 

Was Boston next? Were Al Queda terrorists lurking on street corners, unbeknownst to us innocent bystanders? This class has shed light on the systematic, calculated agenda implemented to encourage this kind of fear. 

Fear invites vulnerability. It provides an opportunity for those employing the fear to take advantage of a lot of people who are scared senseless. After 9/11, journalists stopped questioning the government's interpretations of events, which some people may deem patriotic. To me, it is blatantly irresponsible. So much time has passed since that fateful day, but a number of myths that the government produced to instill fear are still believed today. We HAVE to question the government's take on events! Otherwise, our autonomy will disintegrate. 

I refuse to live in a country where citizens blindly believe a source that is clearly not credible. The government has an agenda, and this reality has to be taken into consideration with every single decision that they make on our behalf. 

 

I think that a student can take what they have learned in this course and react in one of two ways. They can allow the fear that is injected into our society to handicap and isolate them, or they can become active members of a movement centered on truth, honesty, and government accountability. I tell people all the time about what my Communication classes have taught me about government manipulation. More often than not, it blows their minds and opens the door to a real discussion. 

 

What I’ve realized from this class is that I need to be an active member of society, one who speaks out about moral wrongdoing in our media. It is only through activism that anything will change.

 

Power of Nightmares: Part 3

"For a society that values nothing, fear is the only agenda.”

This line, delivered at the end of the Nightmare series, says it all. The systematic fear that has been instilled into the American people has made TERROR the ultimate buzzword of this generation. A lot of elements of the third “Nightmare” installation hit me hard since I was alive and at a very impressionable age when 9/11 happened.

 It is clear that those with the darkest imaginations become the most powerful people in America. They are the ones who come up with the “Preventive Paradigm,” imprisoning people based purely on speculation, or the “Precautionary Principle,” claiming that action taken against a place or person without evidence of their wrongdoing is still justified.

The film pays homage to people who saw how problematic these principles were from the very start. They point out that following the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. government was hoping to find “Al Quaida” members in America and abroad before they even started looking. They had their conclusion before there was any proof that these people even existed. One expert in the film says that a, “Coherent, structured terrorist network with an organized capability led by Osama” was a completely fabricated myth meant to scare Americans and make them that much more willing to go along with U.S. military action. 

Once again, we were chasing after a phantom enemy, this Al Quaida NETWORK that did not exist! We were not willing to admit that perhaps the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were working on their own terms and for their own reasons, not based in a group that spanned across 60 countries, as Bush’s administration continually emphasized.

 Volume 3 of "Nightmares" is disturbing by the nature of its material. All along, there was a desire by the leaders in America to have terrorists, so they filled in the blanks and convinced everyone of this overwhelming threat. It turns out that most of it was rubbish. As the film points out, the last 30 years in politics have been a recovery from a time when they were actually meant to help people. At this stage in the game, they are simply a form of manipulation.

Power of Nightmares: Part 2

 All in all, I found “Power of Nightmares: Part 2” to be even more engaging than Part 1. It was loaded with information about the American neo-Conservatives and radical Islams, and because the material was more relevant to my age group, with explorations into Clinton’s presidency and so on, I found myself enjoying it more because I really understood it. It is very disturbing to learn about the neo-Conservatives’ agenda, as they continue to see themselves as revolutionaries setting out to change the world, because their tactics are so morally corrupt. What struck me in “Part 2” was that the neo-Conservatives did not even see Islams or Saddam Hussein as their real enemy. They were too busy tearing down the liberal party in America and putting up a front that the goal was just to spread democracy. The tactics are just so extreme. Lying, manipulation, a total overhaul of Clinton’s time in office to try to get him impeached. Watching these videos it is difficult to feel inspired about American politics at all. It seems like the only tool in our toolbox is deceit and mind games, always trying to get the upper hand, the power. 

 

In the Conservative party, the “harsh moralism” the film describes is not really about morals at all. The focus on religion seems to be more about condemning people for being bad than looking to a higher power for the purpose of self-improvement. The myth about religion leads into the huge myth in American discourse that American military prowess had anything to do with the fall of the Soviet Union. All these lies build the U.S. up as a country, but it’s a house of cards. It’s all things we tell ourselves, messages that are crafted especially for the public, to make it feel one way or the other about a given policy. This film shows the ins and outs of this manipulation, using Islams and neo-Conservatives as a backdrop.

Power of Nightmares Part 1

The cultural myths that last through decades in society are usually the ones that become known as “truth.”

 “Power of Nightmares Part 1” pointed out systematic fear, coupled with a colonial “good vs. evil” mantra, as arguably the most effective tactic for political leaders to use in controlling the masses. What is striking is that logically, a community mentality and group effort produce significantly more societal change than individualistic values. But starting in the middle of the 20^th century, leaders began to realize the power of channeling fear into the hearts and minds of its citizens. Especially in America, citizens were encouraged to believe that their nation had a unique destiny: to fight the evils of the world. The pride people felt for their country now stemmed from conquering evil, which in turn undermined a shared effort. The myth of fear and colonialism as means of fulfilling one’s civic duties was born. It still flourishes today.

This film had a lot of strong points in illustrating these messages, but it was also very puzzling. It was unclear as to why images from Egypt were being juxtaposed with images from America. The most effective sections of the film were the ones presented most clearly. Since I already have familiarity with American politics, especially Rumsfeld and his blatant lies, I found the footage and discussion of America most engaging. The parts about the Middle East and Egypt were bewildering. There was one scene in which the people of these countries were shown screaming and out of control. The narrator explained that people regressed into a “state of barbarous ignorance” when they were blindly being controlled, and the whole reference was confusing because the words did not exactly sync up with the images. 

Near the end of the film, Neo-conservatives came on to discuss how they feel their role has shifted to now act as “Democratic Revolutionists.” This part of the film summed up some major points, because the men truly believed that their calling in life was to conquer evils of the world, as Americans know best and need to spread the message of freedom. It showed that the myth that Strauss first presented to the political world long ago, centered around a sort of fantasy land in which one must assume that they are going to be attacked, still thrives. More chilling, it is believed.

Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats & Rhymes

What controversial cultural norms are manifested and accepted while we listen to contemporary hip-hop music? 

This is a question I thought about even before exploring the hot topic in an educational setting. As a child of the 90’s and 00’s, music from rappers like Snoop Dog and 50 Cent was  prevalent and the controversial subject matter coursed through the speakers. I remember watching music videos on MTV for hours at a time, when the “M” actually stood for music. I loved the beat of the songs and how the mood of the whole room would change when a bass-ridden Nelly song started playing at a middle school dance. However, I knew deep down that the potential for serious cultural damage was always there. Lyrics centered on violence, misogyny, and homophobia existed in almost every popular hip-hop song. Why was everyone okay with this?

Rather than simply accepting these lyrics and images as “the way it is,” “Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes” delves into the heart of the issues of hip-hop music today. Byron Hurt does a great job pinpointing the major cultural issues of the musical genre, from blatant gun violence to more subtle tones of homo-erotica. 

The high point of the film is its authenticity. 

Because Hurt is a self-proclaimed lover of hip-hop, his criticisms come from a place of genuine concern. When he interviews rappers like Busta Rhymes and Jadakiss, he does not attack them or back them up against the wall. Part of the quest for ratification in the hip-hop world comes from examining the major players in it. Hurt knows this better than anyone, so he asks the tough questions and the resulting interviews come across brilliantly to the viewer. The rappers are candid in their answers because they relate to Hurt and see him as their equal. Would their answers alter if the interviewer were white or female? Absolutely.

One critique I have of the film is its lack of suggestion for viewer activism. Chuck D talks about the importance of accountability in terms of being a man in the music industry, but what about the masses of white suburban kids buying all these hip-hop albums? Where do they fit in to the equation? More exploration into this element would have strengthened the film's message even more.

Edward Said on Orientalism

Edward Said on Orientalism is a relevant and informative film that hits home with many issues of Otherism and difference that exist today. I went into watching the film without understanding what the term “Orientalism” meant, but now I feel more educated on the topic. It is essentially the way in which other countries view Arabs and the Islam world and the discourse that surrounds these constructions. Film creators do a good job implementing Said’s interviews to strengthen certain points. Because Said is Arab himself, his insight on stereotypes from that part of the world are really valuable. A high point of the film is hearing Said’s responses to such horrific events as the Oklahoma City Bombing and news reports that vilify his entire culture. Said’s intellect and calm nature seem to drive the movie’s pace and he looks at the statements made about Arabs as a cultural phenomenon rather than a personal jab. He isn’t saying there is something fundamentally wrong with Americans for having the views they do about the Middle East. It is a construct that has been building up over time which is a huge take-away from this film.

The demonization of Islam in the popular culture is something many Americans are aware of, but the birthplace of such intensely negative generalizations is not often clear. Images of the sensual gypsy woman and the mysterious, secretive Arab world actually began showing up in artwork, as Said points out. The homogeneous and repetitive information the West received about Islam through literature and art barely changed over time, which helps to explain why the ideas we have about the Middle East are so engrained in our culture and so difficult to change. Arabs are portrayed as “villains and fanatics” as the movie puts it, or as a race that needs to be exterminated completely And because many Middle Eastern countries are dependent and subordinate to the U.S., they let these horrible stereotypes persist. Edward Said on Orientalism was made in 1998 but even today in 2012 the movie Acts of Valor shows different races as barbaric and inhumane.

Terror and violence surround the Arab image, while the mistreatment of Islam people are tolerated and sanctioned more than any other race in America. This film does a great job at explaining why. When difference is “respected and understood without coercion,” as Said says, we will really be making some progress. This quote was a great choice for a final send-off.

Reflection So Far

This class has been a real joy for me so far. The discussion forum we have every Monday is structured enough that we generally stay on the topic of that day, but I never feel held back in something I want to or feel compelled to say. Talking about fear in terms of horror films has been especially interesting since I hope to work behind the scenes in filmmaking in the future. Our discussions in class about what scares us connected well to the horror movies we watched outside of class. I personally realized that there is no scientific formula in the creation of scary movies that is guaranteed to frighten people. Each director has his own take on horror and fright, and watching American Nightmare solidified this through the interviews of many film directors. When the Texas Chainsaw Massacre director detailed his creative process, he defined true fear as the events in life that we are afraid to fully open the door to; ideas that we shun and hide away at the onset because they seem to put everything we are certain of in question. I found this insight very relevant to the entire Culture of Fear discourse we’ve studied so far this semester.

 

             In Hall’s “The Work of Representation,” the author brought up the idea of traffic lights representing different ideas, such as red meaning Stop and green meaning Go. These colors mean the same things even globally where the spoken language changes. This concept made me think about fear. There are certain codes in horror films that invite the emotion of being afraid—someone jumping into the frame from the darkness, a sudden movement or deranged look from the perpetrator. Such signifiers do not need to be translated according to which country they are shown. However when it comes to being truly afraid from a movie days, months, or years after viewing it, the fright goes deeper than a sudden jolt on the screen. The fear becomes realized in the conscience, deep down in one’s self where it actually becomes a part of you. The movie Sixth Sense did that for me. It forever changed the way I view the afterlife and I now feel that the spirits of those who passed surround me daily. I believe that fear from an outside source is accomplished only when accessing that deep emotional pool in people’s minds. The nightly news does it every day when they tell us our world is filled with monsters. Everything in this course connects back to that ability to make people question what they thought was certain and unchanging in their lives. It is a topic that never fails to intrigue me and I look forward to the rest of this semester’s studies.

The Mean World Syndrome

“Why have we allowed so much cultural power and influence to fall into the hands of so narrow a range of commercial interests?” This Michael Morgan quote resonated with me after watching The Mean World Syndrome. Morgan effectively unpacks George Gerbner’s final interviews throughout the film, and then delivers the aforesaid quote as a sort of send-off or final message. The film makes it clear that the question of why there is so much violence presented in our media is a very complex query that cannot be answered quickly or succinctly. There is a wide-ranging spectrum of reasons for the violence but they all seem to beg the question, Who exactly is conveying such violent messages and what are they getting out of it? 

Vulnerable people seek out products that promise to enhance and strengthen their lives, and guns are no exception. They seem to guarantee safety, security, and power. Corporate interests thrive from the public’s need to feel protected whilst ultimately feeling vulnerable and alone, because as long as people are buying products all is well and good in their world. The media thus pumps out images of violence even in a forum like the nightly news. The media’s agenda is to make its viewers feel that at any given moment they could be under attack. Guns are dangerous and deadly weapons, but they have been normalized through movies, commercials, and television shows where gun usage and intense acts of violence are standard. Gerbner recognized that such normalization coupled with people’s desire to feel safe and protected is a recipe for acceptance of violence in the media. 

To say that playing violent video games has a cause-and-effect relationship with being violent in real life is a notion that Gerbner quickly shot down. Violence is now such a common discourse that one cannot pinpoint exactly what inspires someone to want to inflict violence upon other people.

Bowling for Columbine

Michael Moore’s documentary Bowling for Columbine was incredibly thought provoking, but in my opinion could have used a more focused message. I kept asking myself throughout the film, “Where exactly is this going?” All of the data that Moore exposed, including America’s staggering statistics on homicidal gun usage, was interesting and educational but the reasons for providing this information were not immediately clear. If Moore’s goal was to present viewers with a comprehensive idea of why gun usage is so prominent in the U.S., he succeeded in the way that quality documentaries often do: prompting viewers to mull it over themselves. But it would have been more effective, at least according to my own viewing preferences, if Moore had made his reasons for making the film clear at the start. This way I wouldn’t have constantly tried to figure them out myself. For example when the tragedy of Columbine was introduced to the film about a half hour into it, I wondered what direction Moore intended to head in. An anti-bullying implication? Why or how parents should be more involved in their children’s lives? After watching the film in its entirety, I believe Moore was looking to Columbine as yet another product of a culture saturated in fear and aggression. The two gunmen were not particularly bullied and their parents were not totally shut out of their lives. But as the film unfolded, I kept thinking that the use of guns was unimportant compared to the rage and evil that results in a killing spree. I see now that the combination of a culture based in fear and access to deadly weapons is the real issue at hand and the one Moore was trying to address.

My time watching Bowling for Columbine was time well spent. Tragedies like Columbine and 9/11 and the many massacres that America has had a hand in are difficult to fully accept, but they are part of a larger cultural narrative. There is a reason why Americans are scared to leave their doors open at night and obsessed with “protecting themselves” from the evil that lurks outside. Moore captured this fear brilliantly, juxtaposing it with a culture that feels inherently safer and more protected: Canada. Through many interviews with a spectrum of different people, some more ignorant than others, Moore brought the issue of gun violence to the forefront of peoples’ minds. His ability to keep calm even when thoroughly disgusted with a situation is admirable, and each scene offered information that was different and new. Bowling for Columbine was disturbing and often uncomfortable, and to me those are traits documentary well done.

American Nightmare

I was thoroughly impressed with the American Nightmare documentary and found it both riveting and disturbing to watch. I could not turn my eyes away from the screen during viewing, as the images were so moving and surreal. It hit on a lot of important aspects of horror films, some of which we have begun to discuss in class including why or how certain images scare us while others are not so effective. By using interviews with directors of classic horror movies from the past fifty years, the documentary acquired a certain credibility and rawness that amplified each clip they used. It seemed that the film was trying to take a long, hard look at the link between horror films and a wider historical lens. What did each movie represent about the fears in our society at the time of its release? Why or how was this significant? To be able to get into the minds of directors who created such classics as Night of the Living Dead, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Shivers was stupefying because it started to answer some of these questions.

One of my favorite parts of the film was the interview with Tobe Hooper, director of the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre released in 1974. Hooper talked about how he came up with the idea for the film, and revealed that it all started when feeling pressured to evacuate a crowded store and laying his eyes upon a chainsaw on the shelves. Having a chainsaw in his arsenal would have broken up the crowd so he could leave easily. He then went even further into his inspiration for this film and discussed the idea of delving into issues that most people shun in their conscious minds. He said that there is a small window into deep, dark, sinister thoughts, but we close the door to those ideas because they frighten us.  As a film director he feels the need to push that door wide open and explore what terrifying film tactics have the most substantial effects on viewers. While watching this section I wondered what questions the interviewer was asking in order to get such incredible responses. It seemed effortless to get Hooper to open up about his process, when in reality it's a very deep and personal topic to talk about so candidly. For this and so many more reasons, I found American Nightmare both educational and socially important.