Revisiting Irigaray

I’ll be honest Irigaray’s essay was a pretty difficult read for me, particularly because there are so many different views on feminism and I found hers to be extremely radical compared to the others I have previously seen. I find it interesting how at the beginning of her essay she refers to women and says the “one must assume the feminine role deliberately” (Irigaray 795). This is radical to me because it seems almost as if it is a silent protest. One has to accept the confined limits and then try and expand upon those. Trying to make radical changes immediately simply won’t work. Perhaps one of her more interesting points is when she talks about mimicry and how it actually needs to be employed in order to work towards a change. I find it very interesting how she actually embraces making these small, adjustments in order to make a change. Irigaray believes that women need to accept the masculine societal beliefs in order to actually make a change. After all, this has worked before, back in the days where women were only viewed as caregivers, women started getting jobs, and while this caused an uproar at the time, now it’s common practice, nobody even gives it a second thought today. I believe that as a society today, Irigaray’s stance on mimesis is gaining traction. I look to popular young adult novels and movies today like The Hunger Games and Divergent where it revolves around a teenage girl. I’m not all that familiar with Divergent, but I am with The Hunger Games and I believe this supports Irigaray’s radical terms in order to further advance these preconceived masculine norms that society holds today. In The Hunger Games trilogy, Katniss wins the 74^th annual Hunger Games by surviving, and outliving 22 other contestants in a fight to the death style setup. This is a movie or concept that would not have been touched ten years ago! But how does this support Irigaray’s claim? Well, Katniss uses what has previously only been seen as masculine behavior, to kill people, hunt, and survive in a game full of brutality. Nowadays, this movie has a very big cultural impact, as it is one of the most widely liked trilogies since the Harry Potter trilogy. And if people want to judge the movie and says it’s not realistic because a woman ends up being the leader in a revolt against the government in the trilogy? That’s fine, but Jennifer Lawrence and the rest of the people involved in the making of the trilogy will laugh that single opinion off as they collect their $500 million, and growing, box office number. Irigaray’s approach on feminism is extremely unique, as she acknowledges the challenge that our system makes for women, but she does not suggest that the approach to fix this happens with immediate, drastic steps. Instead, Irigaray suggests that this is something that has to gradually take one step at a time. Irigaray believes that making small, step-by-step, adjustments will help topple the gender boundaries and beliefs that society has set up for today. I believe that progress is slowly but surely being achieved. Going back to The Hunger Games, Hollywood is now more apt to make movies that star a heroine like Katniss because nobody questions it anymore. While other movies like Twilight accepted the stereotypical gender norms because it dealt with a girl who constantly needed protection from a man in nearly every movie, Hollywood is now shifting to the point where women can play the role of the hero in the movie and there’s no debate about it. Another one of my favorite movies, The Dark Knight Rises, stars Anne Hathaway at catwoman, and although her character is sexualized with what she wears and how she talks at certain points in the movies, at the end of the day she is still a pretty tough character! Catwoman helps save Batman’s life and countless more. I can see it in the movie industry, slowly the mimicry of women has changed into embracing what was previously uncharted territory, and now it’s a regular thing to see a woman anchoring a film no matter what the movie is about. Like I previously mentioned, I was still confused with Irigaray’s essay but I believe having small, subtle steps forward is key in her view of feminism.

Call Poison Control if You’re Bit by a Spider

As I have previously mentioned, The Office is my favorite show of all time so hopefully I don’t go off on a tangent in this blog post. The Office is shot as a mockumentary, which is essentially a documentary crew coming in to this paper company to observe what it’s like having an average job in the paper business and eventually turn this footage into a television show. Along with recording basic dialogue, the characters also get interviewed and asked questions. One thing the characters in the show have to be careful with is how they are under constant surveillance, they know they are being videotaped while they are at work, but it is revealed in the final season of the show that there is a lot more secret footage than they anticipated. Along with being under constant surveillance, often characters feel the need to self-regulate their actions so that the cameras don’t record it.

One scene I would like to refer to is the season 2 episode “The Dundies” which involves some Jim and Pam drama, a plot which the series revolves around. In season 2 Pam is engaged to a warehouse worker, Roy, and after having a big fight she gets drunk at The Dundies and her and Jim hit it off having a great night. When the night is about over in the parking lot Pam thinks she is alone with Jim and says “can I ask you a question?” Of course Jim responds that she can until she realizes the cameras are on the two of them where she says “I just wanted to say thanks.”It is almost certain that Pam was going to ask Jim something romantic, maybe about his feelings for her? Foucault mentions in his article that one “must never know whether they are being looked at at any one moment; but they must be sure that they may always be so” (Foucault 555). In this case, Pam is ready to delve into what their friendship truly is, but instead the cameras are present so Pam must self-regulate her actions to make sure she doesn’t say anything that could land her in trouble. Pam did not realize the cameras were on the two initially, but she realized that the crew could be filming, and unfortunately for Jim, the cameras were rolling which forced Pam to subvert from what her question really was.

While all of the characters fall under Foucault’s theory, one that stands out to me is Stanley. Stanley starts out as a laid back old man, but later in the show in season 6 it is revealed that he is having an affair. Originally this is spread through Gossip, but there are other points in the show where the cameras catch him talking about his affair or film him with his “side woman.” Stanley does not realize that since the documentary crew is filming him all day for nine years that very little of his life is private. Stanley tries his best to self-regulate his actions, but unfortunately the supremacy that the cameras hold is just too much because keeping a secret like this is too difficult. Later, in season 8, when Stanley is on a vacation in Florida to help another store, he is shown driving around in a convertible wearing typical clothes one might see a vacationer wear in Florida. At this point, he is not discreet at all about his motives as he tries to pick up other women while Jim is right there in the car with him. Eventually, Stanley realizes that he is too far gone and does not care that he is under surveillance by the cameras and he’s being recorded hitting on other women.

The last example I’m going to bring up is Jim and Pam’s lack of self-regulation. In the episode “Job Fair” in season 4, Jim closes a big deal and Pam comes back to the office and sees Jim celebrating by drinking a beer with a couple other salesman. Pam acts in excitement and kisses Jim until they realize they are, like always, under surveillance. They then shake hands as a means of congratulations until Jim says “screw it” and they start kissing again because Jim doesn’t care. Jim and Pam both don’t care about self-regulating their actions because they are aware of the fact that the documentary crew has been capturing their romance for years at this point. While initially they are hesitant, they simply don’t care about self-regulation when they have been under watch for 4 years at this point.

There are so many examples that can be used from The Office, or Parks & Recreation, but with The Office, since the employees spend nine years under surveillance they start to get used to it. While they do find out that there is a large amount of disturbing “secret” footage where they thought they were not being recorded, eventually that anger is let go. Especially in the series finale where Jim thanks the documentary crew for allowing him to be able to watch how his life unfolded, how he found love, how he became a dad. In some cases, surveillance can become so commonplace by nature that eventually people just don’t care about trying to perform for the cameras, which is exactly how members of the Dunder Mifflin Scranton branch eventually start spending their days at work.

Big Bang Gotheory

One thing I immediately thought of when talking about subcultures and the punk culture is the episode of Big Bang Theory when Howard and Raj decide to try and go to a club full of gothic people in order to pick up women. Below is a picture where you will notice they wear exclusively black clothing, puzzling accessories, and the best of all, fake tattoos.

While I have no knowledge on the gothic subculture I think that it relates well to Hebidge’s essay. Hebidge talks about graffiti and how it is supposed to “draw attention to themselves” as well express impotence and a kind of power (Hebdige 1258). The point of any subculture is to feel a sense of familiarity and have a level of comfort within the subculture. In the episode of the Big Bang Theory, this is not the case…at all. Howard and Raj go to a “Goth club” where they find two women who are covered in black just about as much as they are. The problem with having a club exclusively for people of Goth culture is that it does not draw attention to the people in the subculture where they are all in one place, therefore this is where the sense of familiarity is put in play. Subcultures, at least in the context of BBT, are shown to demonstrate the dissonance between Howard, Raj, and what Goth culture truly is. What Howard and Raj wear can’t dictate them being a member of Goth culture, it’s not something that can be determined just by clothes. Howard and Raj’s journey nearly ends with the duo getting a tattoo with the two girls, but Howard chickens out quickly beforehand. Howard and Raj are both nerdy scientists who are the complete opposite of Goth culture. Hebdige talks about how “opposing definitions clash with most dramatic force” (Hebdige 1259). This is certainly the case for the scientists because this is their first experience in a different subculture and it does not pay off one bit. I don’t understand the expression of power that Goth culture shows, but after watching this episode of the Big Bang Theory I think Howard and Raj can both agree that one has to be immersed into this culture rather than thrown into it. The oppositions clearly clash in this episode as Howard and Raj strike out with the women they met at the club after they reveal their fake tattoo sleeves. Howard asks if their sheer honesty is enough to convince the girls to like them, but unfortunately for Howard and Raj their chances of seeing those girls again is about as dim as the color black itself.

Barney Stinson, Bob Barker, and Hailing

For this example of Hailing I refer to the character of Barney Stinson from the television show How I Met Your Mother. In the show Barney’s character does not meet his actual father until about season 6 or 7, however there is a flashback when he was a child where his mom tells him that Bob Barker is his dad after Barney asks who his dad is and she points to the television where Bob Barker is hosting The Price is Right. Barney seems to hang on to this belief that Bob Barker is his dad for several years until he finally realizes the truth. Althusser talks about the process of interpellation and how it occurs when an individual being hailed by an ideology accepts the subject position of the ideology and acts accordingly through his or her actions. Barney’s first person perspective in this case is how he sees Bob Barker as his dad and understands this through his perspective. Not only does Barney refuse to pay attention to anyone who tries to tell him differently, but at one point in the show he initiates a plan to get on The Price is Right to inform Bob Barker that he is his son. Barney puts himself in the position of this belief that Bob Barker is his dad, and eliminates any other perspectives. Other flashbacks are shown of Barney as a child where he holds up his report card to the television to show to Bob Barker asking if Bob is proud of him, another flashback shows him dressing up for Halloween and saying that he dressed as his dad, Bob, for Halloween. Since Barney buys into this mindset he acts on the belief system even though it is a ridiculous claim that his dad is Bob Barker. Barney does get to go on stage while he is on The Price is Right, however he does not mention anything to Bob that he is his son. When asked why, Barney says “If you’ve lived your life thinking one thing, it would be pretty devastating to find out that wasn’t true…I just don’t think Bob could have handled it.”This proves that Barney is even further into this mindset, and possibly denial, that Bob is has father, showing he refuses to believe any other perspectives. Even though Bob Barker is not Barney’s father, it makes for a great episode of How I Met Your Mother and a fun example of hailing in pop culture.

Barney on The Price is Right

The Gaze in Gone Girl

One common misconception about “the gaze” is that men are the only ones who initiate this upon women. While writing my final paper, I realized that in the movie Gone Girl, the gaze is turned and put on Nick. Mulvey claims, “the power to subject another person to the will sadistically or to the gaze voyeuristically is turned onto the woman as the object of both” (Mulvey 37). However, in Gone Girl when Nick is on stage at a candlelight vigil for his missing wife, it shows several women staring at him and quietly saying to their friends “he’s so hot” and other middle school gossip like that. The women seem to have no interest in the fact that Nick’s wife has gone missing; instead they are just there to admire Nick and gawk at his looks. This shows that the gaze is not initiated just by males, but females can be guilty of it as well. Advertising today takes advantage of the gaze by having women seductively pose with random objects, like eating a cheeseburger or something outrageous like that. The concept of “the gaze” is geared towards men looking at females, but I think it is important to see that “the gaze” is not confined to just men looking at women.

Mulvey also talks about scopophilia, which she defines as “pleasure in being looked at” (Mulvey 30). SPOILER ALERT COMING FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN’T SEEN OR READ GONE GIRL, DON’T READ AHEAD!!

In Gone Girl, the character who enjoys scopophilia the most is Amy. Nick does not enjoy the pressure and intense scrutiny that he is under but Amy loves it. Amy fakes her death and enjoys seeing everyone believe that she is a sweetheart who was wronged by her husband. In fact, Amy is planning to kill herself, but she does not plan on doing so until after Nick goes to prison for good. This perfectly demonstrates how Amy loves what the media and people make out of her, and how they sabotage Nick. Scopophilia absolutely applies to Amy in Gone Girl, while Nick certainly has no pleasure in being looked at by people questioning him on the whereabouts of his wife.

Ron Swanson and Surveillance

Foucault Surveillance

The concept of surveillance is clearly prevalent throughout this clip. Ron Swanson is someone who keeps to himself and prefers to have very little detail about his personal life exposed to anyone. The surveillance shown in his work computer opposes this and instead violates Ron’s privacy. Foucault writes in Discipline and Punish “the Panopticon is a marvelous machine which, whatever use on may wish to put it to, produces homogenous effects of power” (Foucault 555). In this case, Ron’s computer is the “marvelous machine,” although to Ron it is not so marvelous. The computer produces effects of power because it knows much more about Ron than he believes it should. Ron is such a secretive person that he does not even want people to know when his birthday is, so obviously seeing something like this on his computer is not ideal. On the bright side, at least he found out a way to get rid of the cookies on his computer.

The Google Earth fact is disturbing because it makes it seem like everyone in the world is under constant surveillance! Even though Google Earth doesn’t show who lives at what house, it is still unnerving to see that a company like Google has produced so much power that they can do this without the approval of everyone. Even though people aren’t under surveillance by Google Earth, it makes me wonder if there are other forms of surveillance that could track humans like this. There are several powerful companies that can play the role of the “machine” that Foucault talks about, and produce alarming effects of power to gain an advantage over others. The thought of living in a world like 1984, or Fahrenheit 451 is a pretty terrifying thought, and while I don’t believe that’s where society is going, the thought that we are constantly being watched is alarming.

Lacan and Psychoanalysis: Are we afraid of the truth?

One of the more interesting aspects of this reading to me was when the psychoanalytic perspective is explored. For example, on page 459 it is said that Freud discovered through psychoanalysis that “One is never happy making way for a new truth, for it always means making our way into it: the truth is always disturbing. We cannot even manage to get used to it. We are used to the real. The truth we repress.” Dystopian novels such as Fahrenheit 451 by Bradbury and 1984 by Orwell came to mind when I saw this quote. In both of these novels the truth is subjugated under control of the upper hierarchy in the Dystopian civilizations, in 1984 the concept of “thought police” is instituted as police who prevent members of society from challenging authority. Fahrenheit 451 includes firemen who start fires rather than prevent them, and burn books because they are viewed as too powerful. Freud’s psychoanalysis raises one question to me: Why, as a society, do people submit to accepting these socially constructed norms? People are afraid of what they do not know, so instead this idea of a “perfect” culture is instilled within everyone, but that leaves more questions than answer because what does the word “perfect” really mean? This hinges back to what we’ve talked about before, when it comes to reading the text literally. The most interesting part about “perfect” is that the dictionary definition starts off with the word “conforming.” Much like Freud discovered, people are willing to conform to this ideal human, rather than explore alternatives because the truth genuinely is disturbing, as well as scary. In this reading, Lacan also mentions metaphor and how it is ambiguously interpreted when it comes to signifiers. Since literature is so ambiguous, multiple meanings are appreciated and valued. When it comes to signifiers and the signified, each student would most likely have an extremely different, unique interpretation of what “perfect” actually means. Lacan is a difficult read, but Freud’s psychoanalysis is engaging and thought-provoking, which I thought was perfect.

Bourdieu First Run

     Bourdieu opens up Distinction by talking about taste and how it is an “acquired disposition to ‘differentiate’ and ‘appreciate.’” This rings true in several cases of literature, especially when it comes to the two terms, meaning and pleasure. The unique thing about literature is that everyone has a different opinion. Some people may love reading Jane Austen while others may despise reading her work. The symbols in one novel may mean something to one person, but someone else may have a completely different interpretation. Literature requires this acquired disposition because literature needs to be performed on like surgery, removing, dissecting, and analyzing little things that have big meanings. Bourdieu talks about how people perceive schemes and a large part of this depends on the classification systems that readers use. The great thing about literature is the ambiguity when it comes to interpretations and the open-mindedness that is available while reading. There is never really such a thing as the “right” answer, but instead there is an abundance of answers. Literature is an acquired taste, because it takes years of practice when it comes to explicating text and finding a strong stance. The meaning of the text can easily be differentiated, as well as the pleasure of a text too as some works require a finite amount of analysis to find enjoyment.