Extra credit Blog Post: Visions and Voices presents: Mehfil Massive

I attended the event put on by Visions and Voices called Mehfil Massive: South Asian Religions Remixed Through Poetry and Music. I was unsure what to expect of the event, especially at the start of the event. The speaker, popular actor and comedian D'Lo began by asking where everyone in the audience was from. The geographical breakdown of the audience was mostly South East Asian and Indian. D'Lo is a Sri-Lankan, while many performers where from North and South India, and other regions. It was an extremely diverse crowd and I have to admit I had felt a little out of place as one of the few whites there. For once, whites were the minority and it was interesting to be in this perspective. I kept thinking to myself how it would be like to live as a minority and how it is always a struggle to fit in with the crowd and be accepted by white, American society. When D'Lo was scanning the crowd calling out regions of South Asia, I did not fit into any group and I could see how this translates to society.  If you do not fit the mold of an ethnciity, similar to the 3rd Rock from the Sun episode on identity, society forces you to try to join one to give yourself an identity. I can understand how difficult this would be, to be labeled and associated with the stereotypes of an ethnicity that does not describe your true racial background.

The show featured five performances. Each was an ethnic musical artist who would be complimented by a poet, both representing the specific culture they were from through their words and music. My favorite performer was Kazim Ali and Salman Ahmad, who have performed alongside popular ethnic artist Wyclef Jean--from Haiti. I enjoyed their performance because of the upbeat music as well as cheerful lyrics. Ali instructed gave some advice to the crowd in order to help improve his performance: live in the present moment. I enjoyed his advice and I think had a correlation to appreciate his music more. His reason for this was because when everyone is present in a moment it creates what he calls "mythical ecstasy" and frequently engaged the audience and even had us sing-a-long with him in a chorus to encourage this.  The whole show was a celebration of South Asian religion and music.

It is interesting to note the prevalence of students from this ethnicity at USC, and as a result USC has more international students from South Asian regions than any other college. This statistic reminded me of our class as well as AMST 274. The show featured many aspects of race and ethncity that we discuss in both classes. For example, D'Lo was explaining how her mother would not allow her to play in the front yard as a child because she feared the KKK abducting her. D'Lo comically remarked how the KKK would not want a Sri-Lankan, but nonetheless it shows how certain races live their lives in fear of aspects of society. When D'Lo was finally allowed to play in the front yard she remarked how her mother was like the "American government to the Indians, you can have this tiny piece of land to play on, but we're going to watch you." This example shows how societal institutions govern our lives and the unseen affects they have on races.

 D'Lo frequently alluded to many stereotypes prevalent in society for comedic effect, but they also had a deeper meaning. It shows how although we laugh at these stereotypes, they still exist and have an effect on the ethnicities. For example, she made a couple jokes about her mother and even dressed in disguise as her mom for one set. After, when D'Lo back out her moms character came back on stage said her "mom" told her how the audience was very nice "North Indians." This a joke playing on the fact that North Indians are of lighter complexion than South Indians and because her "mom" saw white people she assumed they were North Indians. This joke illustrates how people make judgements about people based on their connotation, and although not correct they influence how an individual views them. D'Lo also touched on her time spent in Sri-Lanka and how Sri-Lankans do not see white people as superior. She attests this to the fact that there are not many whites in Sri-Lanka and because of it they do not grow up with skewed power relations, such as the social hierarchies in American society. It was apparent D'Lo favored the individuals in the crowd who were from a similar ethnic background as her. She often made jokes celebrating their culture, while also making some jokes at other ethnicities expense. She made one joke in particular about light skin that only about a fourth of the audience laughed at, presumably the Sri-lanks and South Indians, and she followed up by saying "I guess you have to be South Indians to get that one" which created a separation between the audience based on ethnicity and color. It was interesting to be on the opposite end of the joke and how it oscracized a group of people, all because of a joke about stereotypes.

In looking back on the event, it was an extremely well put together event. All the performers were extremely talented and each one told a different story through their music with subjects ranging from the struggle to find identity, overcome hardships, survival, search for prosperity, and belonging to a culture. I wish they would have discussed the performances in greater depth so the audience could get a full understanding of the religions and cultures depicted. Sometimes the musci and poems were too quick to get a full understanding of the conveyed message. Nonetheless, I learned a lot from this event about South Asian cultures, and many topics discussed paralleled our discussions in our class as well as AMST 272. Here is a link to D'Lo's page: http://dlocokid.com/

A5 Blog #2: Audience

The audience plays a very critical role in discussions. First of all, all sides of the rhetorical situation must focus their facts and arguments to suit the viewpoint of those in the audience. In public discussions or debates, one does not try to sway their opponents viewpoints to their side, but rather they want to convince the audience that they are right and to fall in line with their beliefs. For example, in the Presidential debates Obama was not convincing Romney to join the democratic party, but rather he was trying to convince those unsure of where they stand politically to vote for him. Both candidates did so by appealing to the audience on various subjects. The audience determines the direction in which the discussion goes before it even starts because both sides have to attempt to say what the audience wants to hear. Also, the audience can shape the conversation by giving an advantage to one side, while forcing the other to fell as if they are losing the argument--which is when people tend to resort to bad faith argumentation of logical fallacies, lies, and personal attacks. Another way the audience impacts the ethics within a rhetorical situation is by control. The audience ensures that no party steps out of line and completely bashes a party or does anything too crazy. Having an audience makes people be conscientious of their actions for fear of public out-lash, which would ultimately hurt their own image, as well as the viewpoints they represent. If there was no audience, it would be interesting to see how discussions would change. I think they would completely lose structure and purpose where people instead resort to verbal fighting, while making no progress on the discussion of the debated subject. What do you think and how large of an impact do you think the audience has?


            This image, taken from the 2008 Presidential Debate shows how Mitt Romney is actively appealing to the audience.  Mitt answers tot he audiences' questions in a manner to persuade them to vote for him.

A#5 Blog #1: Bad Faith Arguementation

Bad faith argumentation unfortunately continues to plague the arguments people have with one another.  This argumentation is not rewarded in public discussions, but neither does it have to be.  People resort to bad faith arguments when they feel like they are losing the battle, want to take divert the subject, or launch a personal attack on their counterpart.  The latter, I believe, is the most common tactic used today.  Whenever people engage in an argument whether it is in class, on a forum, or social media people are extremely quick to attack the other party as an attempt to discredit them and their argument. 

It is not necessary for discussion to turn into arguments.  Discussions are vital to enhancing one's understanding of a topic by being able to formulate their thoughts as well as hear the oppositions side.  However, peaceful and intellectual discussions are more frequently turning into heated arguments.  This is because of bad faith argumentation--where people will argue about the bad aspects of the oppositions stance, rather than the good found in their beliefs.  This tends to anger people because of its attack on not only the person, but also their beliefs.  People also throw out facts with no proof, allowing people uneductaed on the subject to join in on the argument, moving father and father away from constructive discussion.




I found a clip to examine featuring Bill O'Reilly and a counter-attack of his launched against Jon Stewart.  In the clip, O'Reilly criticizes Stewart for taking his clips out of context, and spinning them in Stewart's favor to appeal to his 45% liberal audience (a statistic of O'Reilly's).  However, when O'Reilly illustrates this point, he is extremely hypocritical because he ends up cutting the clips short, thus taking them out of context as well.  O'Reilly then takes an attack at Stewart's credibility by calling him a satirist as another attempt to diminish any truth found in Stewart's arguments.  The clip cuts back to an interview containing the two where O'Reilly says Stewart is "paid to cheap shot people" illustrating yet again another personal attack on Jon Stewart as an attempt to discredit his beliefs, and career all together.  O'Reilly is known for using bad faith arguments and it is shown in the clip.  

An example of a type of bad faith argumentation: name calling.

A4 Blog #2: Is Devil in a Blue Dress a noir film?

Yes, the film Devil in a Blue Dress is a noir film.  It has many characteristics representative of the genre: lighting, race relations, crime, and even femme fatale.  However, director Carl Franklin extends the film beyond traditional noir boundaries.  He places the setting in the inner cities of Los Angeles in the racially tense 1940s.  In doing so, it sheds light on societies lack of acceptance of minority races during that time.  Whites forced blacks, and other ethnicities, into the inner cities while whites moved to the flourishing suburbs.

Devil in a Blue Dress extends the genre of film noir by allowing minorities to tell the story while controlling their image in cinema.  Carl Franklin is able to accurately illustrate 1940 American society by placing the film behind the color lines, where whites were afraid to go--the inner cities.  The viewers learn many things from the film specifically how distinct the social hierarchy is.  Whites are clearly dominant so much so that people, such as Daphne Monet, completely shed their identity to act white in hopes of equal treatment.  Next, is the rest of the population: inferior ethnic individuals who serve to the whites.  For example, the white detectives bully Easy and force him to do their dirty work for them.  As a result Easy not only gets paid money he needs to survive, but in doing so he uncovers many deep secrets from the shadows and also gets involved with many crimes and deaths.  These are all characteristics of a typical noir film, yet Devil in a Blue Dress extends the genre by placing more emphasis of the lives of minority races. 
Dr. Keeling frequently discusses the impact of ethnicity on the "life chances" given to an individual and Devil in a Blue Dress along with the film Amreeka display the effects of the unequal life chances given ethnic individuals.  Easy works as a detective by doing the dirty work for white investigators to simply make enough money to pay his bills, and Muna similarly struggles to find adequate work once she immigrates to the United States.  Despite having two degrees and over 15 years of banking experience, enough to give one a good "chance" of finding work, Muna cannot find a banking job and ends up working at a fast food restaurant.  Both films illustrate the lack of equality in opportunities given to minorities.

 

Here is a photo showing the woman with 2 degrees and 15 years of Banking experience thrilled to have the "chance" of working at White Castle.  She must take any opportunity given by white society to try to succeed in their society.

A4 Blog 1: Eric Lott's Whiteness of Film Noir

I read an article written by Eric Lott, "The Whiteness of Film Noir" to compliment my understanding of Noir based on the articles we've read, movies watched in class, as well as discussion.  The article analyzes film noir as a film containing an interest in blackened lives and frames to depict racism of 1940's American Life.  Film noir serves to illustrate the differences between perceived racial differences and stereotypes, a topic widely popular in film.  Lott states, "At a moment when bold new forms of black, Chicano, and Asian activism and visibility confronted resurgent white revanchism and vigilantism, film noir's relentless cinematography of chiaroscuro and moral focus on the rotten souls of white folks" to illustrate the struggle between light and dark depictions in film.  This article has reaffirmed what we have learned of how film noir uses lighting and other visual effects to represent how the color of one's skin determines the stereotypes placed on an individual, where it is favorable to be "light".  In this aspect, film noir celebrates those with a light phenotype while doing the opposite for their darker skinned counterparts.

Lott examines the role of women in film noir--a prevalent idea we have already examined in class.  The femme fatal, or  as Lott refers to it female power, is the power given to women in the films and because of this they skew societal relationships.  Women often prey upon men in these films such as the film, The Devil in a Blue Dress, where Daphne Monet has a great amount of influence and causes many unnecessary deaths because of her power.  Lott furthers the examination of women in film noir by stating, "the feminist critique of noir constitutes the most far-reaching account of the self's partitioning (into good/masculine and evil/feminine) in this run of American film and without it our understanding of noir would be impoverished indeed."  It is the portrayal of good/masculine and evil/ feminine that I have paid particular attention to in film noir and has been further brought to my attention thanks to Lott's article.

Here is an example of a femme fatal character common in noir films.  Also, notice how obvious the lighting is, another important aspect of film noir. 


From reading Eric Lott's article I was able to learn and get a better understanding of film noir.  Specifically, how racially charged this genre was.  The white favoritism is apparent through the lighting and depiction of the characters in the films.  On the other hand, the film would use darker scenes and lighting when showing people of darker races to give the feeling an impending crime or something bad is about to occur.  I am very interested in how film noir represents the desire for directors of these 1940'S films to perpetuate existing racial stereotypes in film.


Lott, Eric. "The Whiteness of Film Noir." Whiteness: A Critical Reader. Ed. Mike Hill. New York: New York UP, 1997.  81-101

Speaker Series: Andrew McGuire

I thoroughly enjoyed listening to Mr. McGuire speak.  He is clearly an extremely successful individual in his advocation for improving safety standards for all people.  His powerful passion stems from personal experience and his desire for people to not have to endure the difficulties he did.  I've grown up wearing flame resistant pajamas without even knowing it, and the person responsible for this was speaking on a stage only four rows in front of me.  Mr. McGuire successfully caused one of the most powerful and stubborn industries--tobacco--to change its ways that it has been using since the start of their industry.  I was amazed by the efforts taken by the tobacco industry to avoid changing their product to make the cigarettes self-extinguishing simply because they do not care about the safety of their consumers and the general population.  "Project Hamlet" shows the tobacco companies awareness of the self-extinguishing campaign led by McGuire and after they did several tests to see whether or not the science works, or if it affects the taste/ enjoyment of the cigarette (it did not), they simply kept the improved cigarettes on the shelf until they were forced to use them.  I could not believe this, however it shows the complete lack of ethics and morals widespread through tobacco companies and how could they?  They have one of the deadliest industry in the world.

Another thought that caught my mind during the presentation was what else could have Mr. McGuire achieved had he not had to fight the tobacco industry for so many years.  He is extremely well connected to many burn doctors and surgeons, countless Fire Marshal's, and numerous health services and associations, even many media reporters which allows his a strong arsenal of support in any cause he undertakes.  For these reasons, he was highly involved in making seat belts and airbags mandatory in all vehicles through the California Sunset Clause.  I am curious to see if he takes any action, or if he could have if he didn't have to fight the tobacco companies for so long, to prevent wildfires and other fires (like the student who had a balcony fire) through further improvements to cigarettes.  I hope he does he is a person with a great ability to create positive change.

Here is a page describing the accomplishments of McGuire: http://pnhpcalifornia.org/andrew-mcguire/