So there is this new show on NBC called Kings that I am absolutely in love with right now. Seriously, anyone who talks to me on a frequent basis knows I won’t shut up about it. Incase people don’t watch it (go do so!), it is basically about what America (or rather an American-like country) would be like with a king, and it is based off the biblical story of King David (and King Saul as well I suppose). I think one of the things I enjoy so much about it is being able to catch all the parallels to the Biblical story because it’s fun to see how they modernized the events and it just makes me feel smart. The main character in the show is David Shepherd (the biblical David was a shepherd) who is the youngest of 8 sons (as the biblical David was). David’s mother is a single mother named Jesse (the name of the Biblical David’s father). The king’s name is Silas (counterpart – King Saul), his son’s name is Jack (nickname for john or Jonathan—Saul’s son and David’s friend) and his daughter (with whom David is beginning to be ‘romantically involved’) is named Michelle (counterpart – Michal, Saul’s daughter and David’s wife). The reverend at the palace is named Reverend Samuels (counterpart – The prophet Samuel). The plot also closely follows that of the biblical story, though obviously with modern twists. It’s a smart, well thought out story line and I am tragically addicted already. There is a plot synopsis (albeit very poor—it’s Wikipedia after all) here, But I’d suggest watching the show.
Now to the point. The part of the show I’m going to focus on is David’s mother, and more specifically the choice to make her a single mother. While I found the choice to turn the Biblical David’s father into a single mother intriguing from the get go, I think this is an especially interesting concept in light of reading Jane Juffer. Juffer talks about how less than two decades ago politicians were running around saying that single mother we’re more or less evil and caused all of society’s problems and so forth. She then points out how in the last few years this image has shifted. She sites Gilmore Girls and Bush’s talk of single mother’s being heroes. This show, this choice to turn a formally male role into that of a single mother (much like the movies we talked about in class such as Invasion of the Body Snatchers) goes right along with what Juffer is talking about.
But I find myself asking why. Why the switch from a (presumably) married father to a single mother? It’s not that I’m opposed to the switch, I’m simply intrigued. Is it merely an attempt to make the show have more modern relevance? The shows writer Michael Green did say that the wanted to take the story and “re-conceive it while still being faithful to the original material but at the same time exploring the themes, modernizing it in every way.” And a single mother does add a very modern, very non-biblical twist (not to say that the Bible is against single motherhood, just that it wasn’t a popular thing in those times). With the percent of single mothers seeming to be constantly on the rise this certainly seems a valid reason for Jesse to be a single mom. Or are the show’s writers trying to make a statement about single mothers being sufficient parenting for a child? David certainly seems very polite and well brought up where as Jack for example, brought up by both a mother and a father, seems to be prone to selfishness, rudeness and materialism. This points out that it may not be about the number of parents but who the parents are that impacts a child more and also seems like a valid reason for Jesse’s switch. Or are they following Bush’s proclamation of the single mother as a hero, showing her as this woman of strength who raised 8 sons after the tragic death of her husband in a war. She does appear to be a woman of strength and virtue, proud of her son’s accomplishment (watch the show to find out what) but weary of politics and fame. So perhaps this is the reason they chose to make Jesse a single mom.
Maybe it is a combination of the above or something I have not thought of. I guess it’s hard to tell exactly why they made that particular decision until there are more episodes and we see the character evolve and such. And even then it’s often hard to tell exactly what someone’s intentions were. But I think it is a very interesting choice and one that I am excited to see grow as the season(s) progress. One more plug for the show, because I am truly overly excited about it: Watch it Sunday nights on NBC at 7pm! :]
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
On Visa commercials and poor song choices
So last night I was watching TV (not a movie by the wayJ) and the commercials came on. Again. Being generally fed up with the absurd amount of commercials in television normally I found it especially unnecessary for there to be a five minute commercial break in between each and every contestant on American Idol. So when the commercials came on for the umpteenth time I got up to check my email, anything to avoid yet another ‘Hefty’ garbage bags add. But as I was walking away from the TV I heard the opening riffs of a song I knew and loved. I stopped dead in my tracks and looked back to see what company could have possibly chosen ‘Tuesday Afternoon’ by The Moody Blues (I know I know, I’ve finally broken out of my movie rut and now I’m stuck in a Moody Blues rut. But what can you do?)as the song for their commercial. At first I thought perhaps they were on tour and coming to the area—and exciting notion indeed—but upon watching further I realized it was a Visa commercial. Here’s the link to the commercial if you want to watch it.
Basically the commercial starts with part of the song and has fish and such swimming around in the background. Then a voice comes over saying “When was the last time you went to the aquarium – pause– with your daughter – pause– on a Tuesday?” As he is saying this the fish in the background form the word ‘go’. He then goes on to explain how Visa card are faster and more convenient than cash or check (as a former employee at McDonalds and someone who has handled all the forms of paying many times I feel inclined to ask “faster and more convenient for whom?” Certainly not the cashier let me tell you) and how thousands of people are ‘going place’ with Visa. After realizing what the commercial was about—consumerism, buying things in order to be happy, essentially ‘money (or credit cards) can buy happiness’—the song choice really struck me as odd. It does not seem to fit the feel of the commercial at all. In order to illustrate this I will deconstruct the song and what the Visa commercial is saying.
Tuesday Afternoon (Full lyrics here)
Now I'm on my way – Not going
It doesn't matter to me – Worry
Chasing the clouds away, the trees are drawing me near (Nature) – Material/man made things
I'm looking at myself reflections of my mind – looking into other things/the world
So gently swaying through the fairyland of love – Um, industrial world
If you'll just come with me you'll see the beauty of Tuesday afternoon – Beauty/happiness in material things, things you can buy
So in essence the song has always seemed to me to be very…pure I guess, for lack of a better word. It’s all about finding joy peace and happiness in the simply things—clouds, trees, a Tuesday afternoon—things you don’t have to pay for.
Visa, to me has a very different message. It’s hard to deconstruct Visa as it does not have lyrics or what have you to do so with, but I can give a general message that Visa projects that will illustrate why it clashes so horribly with its song choice. In essence, as I said before, Visa is all about buying happiness. They hide behind notions of family time (going to the aquarium with your daughter, etc) and taking time to relax and be alone, but in essence they are all saying the same thing. They make it seem as though you need a Visa card in order to obtain these simple pleasures. And why would you need a Visa card if you did not have to pay for these things. So what Visa is saying is that in order to be happy or spend time with your family you have to spend money. The exact opposite of what The Moody Blues are saying in ‘Tuesday Afternoon’. The song and the commercial are like oil and water. They simply don’t mix. It is consumerism vs. simple, costless pleasures. It is finding joy in watching the clouds vs. paying for entertainment. Therefore the central argument or message of the song is not the central message or argument of the commercial, even though it is essentially what the commercial is all about. In a way, the center is not the center, though perhaps that is a rather lose analysis. It makes me wonder what Derrida would have to say about Visa’s poor song choice, an interesting notion indeed.
I would advise Visa to be more careful about their song choices in the future, because although I love to see The Moody Blues recognized (something that rarely happens because they came from—though were not limited to—a decade so vastly monopolized by the Beatles) I hate to think of how horrendously different the two messages in the commercial are and would prefer they had just left the Song alone. If the band were dead I have a feeling they would be turning over in their graves at the use of their song in such a way. As they are still alive and kicking that is not a valid opinion so instead I am going to chose to say that they are in all likely hoods not the commercial's biggest fans.
Basically the commercial starts with part of the song and has fish and such swimming around in the background. Then a voice comes over saying “When was the last time you went to the aquarium – pause– with your daughter – pause– on a Tuesday?” As he is saying this the fish in the background form the word ‘go’. He then goes on to explain how Visa card are faster and more convenient than cash or check (as a former employee at McDonalds and someone who has handled all the forms of paying many times I feel inclined to ask “faster and more convenient for whom?” Certainly not the cashier let me tell you) and how thousands of people are ‘going place’ with Visa. After realizing what the commercial was about—consumerism, buying things in order to be happy, essentially ‘money (or credit cards) can buy happiness’—the song choice really struck me as odd. It does not seem to fit the feel of the commercial at all. In order to illustrate this I will deconstruct the song and what the Visa commercial is saying.
Tuesday Afternoon (Full lyrics here)
Now I'm on my way – Not going
It doesn't matter to me – Worry
Chasing the clouds away, the trees are drawing me near (Nature) – Material/man made things
I'm looking at myself reflections of my mind – looking into other things/the world
So gently swaying through the fairyland of love – Um, industrial world
If you'll just come with me you'll see the beauty of Tuesday afternoon – Beauty/happiness in material things, things you can buy
So in essence the song has always seemed to me to be very…pure I guess, for lack of a better word. It’s all about finding joy peace and happiness in the simply things—clouds, trees, a Tuesday afternoon—things you don’t have to pay for.
Visa, to me has a very different message. It’s hard to deconstruct Visa as it does not have lyrics or what have you to do so with, but I can give a general message that Visa projects that will illustrate why it clashes so horribly with its song choice. In essence, as I said before, Visa is all about buying happiness. They hide behind notions of family time (going to the aquarium with your daughter, etc) and taking time to relax and be alone, but in essence they are all saying the same thing. They make it seem as though you need a Visa card in order to obtain these simple pleasures. And why would you need a Visa card if you did not have to pay for these things. So what Visa is saying is that in order to be happy or spend time with your family you have to spend money. The exact opposite of what The Moody Blues are saying in ‘Tuesday Afternoon’. The song and the commercial are like oil and water. They simply don’t mix. It is consumerism vs. simple, costless pleasures. It is finding joy in watching the clouds vs. paying for entertainment. Therefore the central argument or message of the song is not the central message or argument of the commercial, even though it is essentially what the commercial is all about. In a way, the center is not the center, though perhaps that is a rather lose analysis. It makes me wonder what Derrida would have to say about Visa’s poor song choice, an interesting notion indeed.
I would advise Visa to be more careful about their song choices in the future, because although I love to see The Moody Blues recognized (something that rarely happens because they came from—though were not limited to—a decade so vastly monopolized by the Beatles) I hate to think of how horrendously different the two messages in the commercial are and would prefer they had just left the Song alone. If the band were dead I have a feeling they would be turning over in their graves at the use of their song in such a way. As they are still alive and kicking that is not a valid opinion so instead I am going to chose to say that they are in all likely hoods not the commercial's biggest fans.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
What the greatest 60's band has to say on 'lack'.
Looking back I noticed that three out of my four blog posts have been about movies. This makes it seem as though I do nothing but watch movies. However; contrary to how it may seem I do many other things in my free time. It occurred to me that I should find something other than movies to write about. One thing I enjoy doing other than frequenting Parkwood 18 in St. Cloud is listening to music. One of my all time favorite bands is a band that originated in the 60’s (no, not the Beatles). The band is called The Moody Blues and to me they are the greatest band the 60’s produced. No offence intended to any Beatles fans :). My favorite album by them is Days of Future Passed, their second album, released in 1967. On it they teamed up with the London Festival Orchestra to create an album that goes through a whole day in song, starting at dawn and ending at night. On both the first and last songs of the album there are parts of a poem, written by Graeme Edge, drummer and song writer for the band.
The poem is about night time and the transition from night to day. It is fairly short so I will put the whole thing on here rather than a link:
Cold hearted orb that rules the night
Removes the colors from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which is right.And which is an illusion?
Pinprick holes in a colorless sky,
Let insipid figures of light pass by,
The mighty light of ten thousand suns,
Challenges infinity and is soon gone.
Night time, to some a brief interlude,
To others the fear of solitude.
Brave helios wake up your steeds,
Bring the warmth the countryside needs.
...
Breathe deep the gathering gloom,
Watch lights fade from every room.
Bedsitter people look back and lament,
Another day's useless energy spent.
Impassioned lovers wrestle as one,
Lonely man cries for love and has none.
New mother picks up and suckles her son,
Senior citizens wish they were young.
'Cold hearted orb that rules the night
Removes the colors from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which is right.
And which is an illusion?
As I was driving back from my spring break trip I was listening to this album and once again struggling to decide what to write about for my blog. But as I was listening to the words in the poem I noticed how it examined lack, or more specifically the relationship between ‘lack’ and ‘have’. Lines 16 to 21 all focus on differences between people: people who have youth vs. people who are old, people who have love vs. people who do not, etc. this then reminded me of our discussion in class about how we define ourselves and how one way is by what we are not. This poem hits on that exact relationship or method of self definition. As Jacques Lacan said in The Agency of the Letter in the Unconscious "I think where I am not; therefore I am where I do not think." In other words, I think about what I am not and therefore I am the things I don’t think about. In terms of the poem, when the senior citizens wish they were young they are focusing on what they are not (young) and they are what they are not thinking about (old). The ‘lonely man’ cries for love, thinking about what he does not have/what he lacks—love—while being/having what he is not thinking about—loneliness. In the same way we often seem to go through life ‘thinking where we are not’. We are defining our existence through what we are not rather than what we are; because for everything you are there is a whole list of things you are not.
After I started to look closer at the poem I also noticed another relevant part. The line “Night time, to some a brief interlude, to others the fear of solitude” made me start thinking of what Lacan said about the unconscious. The same signifier (night time) is to some nothing more than an interlude between days, but to others it brings out the fear of being alone. Lacan would say that this difference has to do with eh persons unconscious—made up of experiences, fears, desires, random thoughts, etc—and would work to help them become aware of their unconscious through psychoanalysis in order to better understand themselves and why the same signifier makes them feel this way instead of that way.
Finally, I started to think of other Moody Blues lyrics and how they might pertain to Lacan. After giving it some thought I realized that the song ‘Nights in White Satin’ (also off Days of Future Passed) is also defined by lack. I won’t put up all of the lyrics because it is too long, but here is the link to them. In the song there are lines like “Nights in white satin, never reaching the end, letters I’ve written, never meaning to send”, “Beauty Id always missed” and “Just what I’m going through, they can understand” are all about lack—lack of beauty, lack of end, lack of understanding and so forth. Just as ‘I Can’t Get No Satisfaction’ was dictated by what the writer lacked, so is ‘Nights in White Satin’ dictated by what the writer lacked. As I said before, so much of how we see and define ourselves is dictated by lack, what we are not, ‘where we do not think’. This is not necessarily good or bad, simply an observation on how society defines itself. An observation that Lacan says in key to unlocking and understanding the unconscious.
The poem is about night time and the transition from night to day. It is fairly short so I will put the whole thing on here rather than a link:
Cold hearted orb that rules the night
Removes the colors from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which is right.And which is an illusion?
Pinprick holes in a colorless sky,
Let insipid figures of light pass by,
The mighty light of ten thousand suns,
Challenges infinity and is soon gone.
Night time, to some a brief interlude,
To others the fear of solitude.
Brave helios wake up your steeds,
Bring the warmth the countryside needs.
...
Breathe deep the gathering gloom,
Watch lights fade from every room.
Bedsitter people look back and lament,
Another day's useless energy spent.
Impassioned lovers wrestle as one,
Lonely man cries for love and has none.
New mother picks up and suckles her son,
Senior citizens wish they were young.
'Cold hearted orb that rules the night
Removes the colors from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which is right.
And which is an illusion?
As I was driving back from my spring break trip I was listening to this album and once again struggling to decide what to write about for my blog. But as I was listening to the words in the poem I noticed how it examined lack, or more specifically the relationship between ‘lack’ and ‘have’. Lines 16 to 21 all focus on differences between people: people who have youth vs. people who are old, people who have love vs. people who do not, etc. this then reminded me of our discussion in class about how we define ourselves and how one way is by what we are not. This poem hits on that exact relationship or method of self definition. As Jacques Lacan said in The Agency of the Letter in the Unconscious "I think where I am not; therefore I am where I do not think." In other words, I think about what I am not and therefore I am the things I don’t think about. In terms of the poem, when the senior citizens wish they were young they are focusing on what they are not (young) and they are what they are not thinking about (old). The ‘lonely man’ cries for love, thinking about what he does not have/what he lacks—love—while being/having what he is not thinking about—loneliness. In the same way we often seem to go through life ‘thinking where we are not’. We are defining our existence through what we are not rather than what we are; because for everything you are there is a whole list of things you are not.
After I started to look closer at the poem I also noticed another relevant part. The line “Night time, to some a brief interlude, to others the fear of solitude” made me start thinking of what Lacan said about the unconscious. The same signifier (night time) is to some nothing more than an interlude between days, but to others it brings out the fear of being alone. Lacan would say that this difference has to do with eh persons unconscious—made up of experiences, fears, desires, random thoughts, etc—and would work to help them become aware of their unconscious through psychoanalysis in order to better understand themselves and why the same signifier makes them feel this way instead of that way.
Finally, I started to think of other Moody Blues lyrics and how they might pertain to Lacan. After giving it some thought I realized that the song ‘Nights in White Satin’ (also off Days of Future Passed) is also defined by lack. I won’t put up all of the lyrics because it is too long, but here is the link to them. In the song there are lines like “Nights in white satin, never reaching the end, letters I’ve written, never meaning to send”, “Beauty Id always missed” and “Just what I’m going through, they can understand” are all about lack—lack of beauty, lack of end, lack of understanding and so forth. Just as ‘I Can’t Get No Satisfaction’ was dictated by what the writer lacked, so is ‘Nights in White Satin’ dictated by what the writer lacked. As I said before, so much of how we see and define ourselves is dictated by lack, what we are not, ‘where we do not think’. This is not necessarily good or bad, simply an observation on how society defines itself. An observation that Lacan says in key to unlocking and understanding the unconscious.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)