Video Subproject

CNN iReport - Christians and the Media

(Oct 8, 1970)

For better or worse, we spend A LOT of time in front of our image-machines.  While I did not read this particular chapter until after making the iReport video, it is clear that this chapter on the Transversal is quite relevant to the issues raised in the video.  Ulmer writes that "the agenda-setting power of popular culture is based on its ability to transform science and history [and I would add religion, or the naively purported lack-thereof that constitute the mythology of our society" (95).  In contemporary society, Christian belief and ideology is at risk of being wholesale written out of the societal mythology.

One might see the approach of increasing Christian representation in Entertainment media as somewhat consistent with the strategies advocated by Ulmer.  In that our "identity experience" (99) is connected and influenced through a growing visual and electrate world, and that "one's own scene may be figured by the news[/entertainment media]" (95), it makes sense to explore that world of the Spectacle as a way of "using the visible to write the [increasingly] invisible" (111).  Breaking through the emerging barriers, though, may be difficult, in that the public sphere "sanctions certain images and not others" (100), and the image of the normal/sane Christian is an image that seems to be on the outs. 

Video ALSO posted on CNN's iReport:  http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-345054

(NOTE:  Video Clips obtained from Public YouTube channels of ABC and IGN Downloads)

Referenced News Articles:

Roland Martin: "Hollywood and God can co-exist" - CNN.com

"GLAAD Sad about Grey's" - TVGUIDE.com

Neon Lights, Full Moons, and Lucy

(October 30, 1964) 

Ulmer seems to have a rather distinct answer to that question.

Below is my video response (albeit spoken rather quickly) to the next section of the readings:

Links:

BBC Posts:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/641394.stm

Monte Schulz Interview: http://www.newsarama.com/comics/091014-Schulz-Jordan-Fantagraphics.html

"I'm a Lucy" YouTube Page:  http://www.youtube.com/user/IMaLUCY

Software/FREEware Link:

CamStudio (Screen Capture video software): http://download.cnet.com/CamStudio/3000-13633_4-10067101.html?tag=mncol

A New Language

(Oct 11, 1962)

I do not have much experience speaking through the language of film/video.  My vocabulary is pretty limited, and my accent is even worse.  But, like with any new language, practice by immersion is the best way to learn, and thus my video response to the next portion of the readings:

"Hot Summer Lights"

(c. 1962)

We all have things to work out - both collectively and as individuals... things that perhaps lemonade stands alone can't solve... things that doctors alone can't solve.  It seems, from this section of reading in Ulmer, that Monuments, or more perhaps more precisely MEmorials, are intended to heal something, someone, someones. They help us find ourselves within our relationships to the collective (18) and work inventively to address particular issues of concern (13). Ulmer quotes Gloser as saying of Beuys Wound Works that it is an “attempt to heal the place” (27). Perhaps we should return at some point to questioning this notion of healing and wounds, but first let’s take a look at what might be another example (though probably not as direct or as insightful as those discussed in ch1) of monumentality.

Cedar Point is a roller coaster amusement park located in Sandusky, Ohio. During most evenings in the park, the Midway is filled with the “Hot Summer Lights” show. The show is a combination of video and animation displayed on a large screen, loud music of all genres, and choreographed pyrotechnics. Debuted in 2006 (http://www.cedarpoint.com/public/news/history/index.cfm), the show features elements that speak to the need that Americans have for unifying, even in our exceptionally diverse and heterogeneous society.

The show is set in the center of this massive roller coaster park. This is not exactly the site of “wounds” that Ulmer hints at being a profitable location for monuments (though the park is on a peninsula which is often rumored to be sinking – so perhaps there is something to be said about that, in Cedar Fair’s constant need to make structural improvements to safeguard their multi-million dollar rides’ longevity). The towering rides, some over 400 feet tall serving as an ominous backdrop to the displays on the screen. It is an impressive place of play: “the more a place is set apart for free play, the more it influences people’s behavior and the greater is its force of attraction” (Chtcheglov qtd. In Ulmer 29).

The images include many scenes from the park, including computer generated animations of riding a roller coaster, but there are two highlights to the show (at least as evidenced by the crowd reaction). The first is the BigTen section. In this section, the school fight song for each of the BigTen schools is played while footage of their football teams is shown. This elicits wild cheers from the massive crowds sitting on the pavement watching (the biggest cheers coming during the Ohio section and the biggest boos coming during the Michigan section). This is an example of that simultaneous need to recognize and build individuality and community that our society is made up of. In a period of national identity crisis, sports serve as a metaphor for individuals relating to themselves through their relationships with others and larger institutions (similar to the superego discussed by Ulmer through Freud/Deleuze/Guattari (18-21).

The next section of the show that generates a strong reaction from the crowd (the tourists) is the patriotic section. During my last visit to the park, I could see dad’s swaying with their sons and daughters on their shoulders and mom’s having their little ones salute or place their hands over their hearts as they watched images of tire swings and fields of grain to the tune of “Proud to be an American.” It struck me then that this was an important cultural ritual – and I now see it as a sort of monumentalizing, in that “it is not what tourists say but what they do that counts” (25).

So this may be an example of monumentalizing or memorializing. Is it tied to a specific problem or wound that needs healing? Maybe – our national/social identity crisis at this current state. If we move past this point (though Ulmer seems to indicate that we will inevitably de-nationalize in our conceptions – see page 29), does this cease to be a monument/memorial in the Ulmerian sense? Rushmore still seems to be, so I suppose this would as well (though admittedly I am still grappling with what it means to be monumental/memorial in the Ulmerian sense of the terms).

Images Subproject