Media Analysis On Violence, Rape, and Little Red Riding Hood

RED, from directors Jorge Jaramillo and Carlo Guillot is an interpretation based on the fairy tale "Little Red Ridding Hood". Jaramillo and Guillot's interpretation is gruesomely violent, and yet (as I will further explore below), is also a beautiful take on a classic story. Here is a description of the piece from the directors:

"Based on a true fairy tale. As the silhouette of a lonely girl runs through the woods, something in the shadows is lurking her. RED is an animated short film, which presents a new version of the classic tale "Little Red Riding Hood" by Charles Perrault. The directors Jorge Jaramillo and Carolo Guillot explore more thoroughly the drama, horror, and realism of the story. A journey of feelings and moments, with visual and musical elements existing only to carry a clear and strong narrative. In RED the directors based on traditional shadows animation, giving it a new perspective by using technology to create a new concept, while maintaining the visual and narrative force of the classic technique."

[vimeo http://www.vimeo.com/38704159 w=500&h=281]

I should also note that Elizabeth Marshall (2004) argued that classic tales like "Little Red Riding Hood" were initially "tied to practices of childhood rearing . . .and disciplining young readers into normative heterosexual femininity and masculinity" (pg. 261). The original tale of "Little Red Riding Hood" was just as violent in that the story functioned as a psychological ploy to discipline children into gender norms. Now we might understand this piece as relates to the sexuality of young girls and rape culture, as Marshall writes,

“Little Red Riding Hood, like constructions of rape victims in contemporary discourses of law and media, was in unauthorized territory, the forest rather than the home, talking in a free and uninhibited way to a male who wasn't her husband or father. In popular parlance, Little Red "’asked for it’" (268).

"Little Red Riding Hood"'s violent beginnings has since been diluted as a tale of childhood fantasy, that is until now with Jaramillo and Guillot's interpretation.

I'm uncertain about the primary audience toward which Jaramillo and Guillot's piece is targeted. However, given that this piece has since gone viral (largely due to Jezebel.com's write-up) and is readily available on Vimeo, I'm sure the piece has been consumed by people of various ages and groups.

Number of violent acts: 1

The nature of violent acts: RED physically slaughters the wolf with a knife and breaks the wolf's neck, killing the wolf in a violent confrontation. I would be remiss not to mention the psychological violence associated with this exchange. Though RED is an animated girl, one can only imagine that if she were 'real' the pychological impact of such a gruesome act would have long lasting traumatic effects.

Harris' discusses cartoon violence as "stylized and unrealistic" and as a result may "induce[d] fear or desensitization" (pg. 273) in viewers since the events could not happen in 'real life'. In other words, it seems Harris is arguing that viewers might allow themselves to indulge effortlessly in cartoon violence, which can also be humorous, since there is less 'real life' consequences tied to the media itself. Perhaps it is much easier to suspend fear in an animated world. For me, however, this piece is cathartic. If I had to categorize my reaction to the piece based on the readings, I might relate my reaction to the fear-of-victimization effect, with some caveats. I do not necessarily think that RED's cathartic effect has to do with the idea that the more media like RED that I consume, the more I am afraid of becoming a victim of violence (Bushman, et al., pg. 364). However, I do feel a sense of what Harris describes as an "emotional purging" (pg. 276) when I watch the piece. I enjoy watching RED, not necessarily for the violence acts themselves, but rather because the violent acts are perpetrated on a known perpetrator, the wolf. It may be that I am experiencing what Sparks identifies as post-viewing gratification related to the character, RED, herself. I find pleasure, albeit intellectual, in watching RED kill the wolf. She avenges the death of Little Red, whom she apparently drags away at the end of the piece. This act of vengeful violence appeals to my sense that the wolf, or the rapist/murderer, got what he deserved. RED avenges the victim's death, and all (seems) right in the world. Aside from the gratification quality of the work, the technical aspects involved in the piece are quite beautiful.

An aside:

When Walter Benjamin quoted poet Filippo Tommaso Marinetti, "War is beautiful", in The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Production, he was doing so to express the aesthetics of war. For Marinetti, the physical structure of weapons and even the printed propaganda associated with war was artful. In the case of RED, (or the technology involved in the production of RED), this piece has an aesthetic, albeit violent, quality. This is not to say, however, that the violent acts themselves are to be admired.

For me, RED is a beautifully produced piece of technology art. The directors tell a story that is both well-produced and thoughtfully mediated with the use of technology. Aside from it's technical merits, I find that this story is beautiful because I understand that humanity is often found in some of the most gruesome and perverse expressions. RED is essentially an aesthetically stunning piece of callous emotion. Yet I understand that the aesthetics of violence in this case is beautiful only because the nature of the violent act itself is vile.

I also admit that my sense of gratification might be based on prior experiences engaging in domestic violence and sexual assault advocacy as well as my academic background in gender studies. Certainly Marshall's discussions on "Little Red Riding Hood" sat in the back of my mind as I watched this piece. Considering all of the exposure to prior experiences and perspectives, perhaps I was primed (Sparks, pg. 91) for this moment, and reacted according to previous associations with the "Little Red Riding Hood" tale.

References

Benjamin, W. (1968). Illuminations. New York: Schocken Books. Bushman, B.J., Husemann, L.R., & Whitaker, J.L. (2009). Violent media effects. In Nabi, R.L. & Oliver, M.B. (Eds.), Media processes and effects. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Harris, R. (2009). Violence: Watching all that mayhem really matters. In A cognitive psychology of mass media. (5th ed). pp. 257-290. Marshall, E. (2004). Stripping for the wold: Rethinking representations of gender in children's literature. Reading Research Quarterly. 39(3). pp. 256-270. Sparks, G.G. (2010). Effects of media violence. In Media effects research: A basic overview. pp. 80-104. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.

A Theoretical Explanation for Why Someone Would Tattoo Drakes Name on Her Forehead

Uses and Gratifications Theory (U&GT) or perspective "places emphasis on the active role of the audience in making choices and being goal-directed in its media-use behavior” (pg. 37). In other words, this theory looks at the ways in which the viewer chooses to put certain media to use. It also says that depending upon the ways in which the viewer takes pleasure in (or is motivated by) certain media will determine certain behaviors associated with media use. Incidentally, cultivation theory has been reinterpreted in line with a uses and gratification approaches, stressing the active mental activity of the viewer while watching (pg. 35). Harris presents the horror film example to illustrate U&G perspective. That is to say, watching a horror film will vary for different people depending upon how the person develops empathy, or not, to the victim in the film. Perhaps most notable about U&GT involves what Harris deems as the critical issue of “what draws different people to consume different types of media” (pg. 38). For example, why do people watch violent pornography? What use and gratifications come from such a viewing experience? The uses and gratifications perspective may lead researchers to understand other social, cultural, and psychological factors, besides media consumption, that influence why people consume certain types of media, particularly media that are violent in nature. Harris continues to outline six current research directions for uses and gratifications research. These six approaches involve the following:

1. developing taxonomies of communication motives.
2. comparing motives across media. This is particularly important for CMT research.
3. looking at different social and psychological circumstances of media use (e.g. coviewers, personality, lifestyle, or religiousity).
4. looking at how one’s motivations for using media are satisfied or not.
5. examining the role of individual differences in experiences, motives, and exposure on the media experience.
6. studying measurement issues like the reliability and validity of instruments measuring motivation.

Another notable insight for Harris’ section on U&GT constructs concern how people form relationships with media figures they have never met. Harris cites these relationships, whether between viewers and real people or with viewers and fictional characters in media, as parasocial interactions (Klimmt, Hartmann, & Schramm, 2006, etc) (pg. 38). The following are some useful examples that illustrate parasocial interactions, a construct of U&GT:

• Judith Warner's NYT article, Sometimes a President is Just a President is about the surge of Obama fantasies and dreams by U.S. Americans after he was elected president. Warner begins her article by describing a dream she had about President Obama. She then references friends and strangers who have admitted to having sexually explicit dreams about the President and the First Lady, Michelle Obama. The way in which people admitted to identifying closely with the Obamas was not only illustrated through sexually explicit dreams but through fantasies of close friendships. From the article: "These are people for whom the Obamas are not just a beacon of hope, inspiration and 'demigodlikeness,' as a New York lawyer put it, but also a kind of mirror. And the refracted image of self they see is not one they much admire."

• Fan tattoos Drake's name on her forehead. Drake is a popular actor-turned-rapper/artist whose music videos continuously appear on MTV, BET, VH1. His songs are also on heavy rotation on various hip-hop and R&B radio stations around the country. This is probably one of the most bizarre displays of how a a super fan (or stan) illustrates a sense of closeness to a media figure she has never met. I haven't come across her response yet, but for the full interview with the tattoo artist who tattooed the name "Drake" on the women's head, see Vice.

Reference

Harris, R.J. (2009). A cognitive psychology of mass communication. Routledge.

In the future, we will be the Internet

Excerpt from Azuka Nzegwu's dissertation "The Conduit and Whirlpooling: A New Theory of Knowledge Constitution and Dispersion" (2010)

"[Philip Emeagwali's] prediction is that in one hundred years, people will become nodes, which are connective dots, on the Internet. He describes a scenario fifty years from now in which the body of one’s grandchild will be registered as, and become a node on, the Internet. As a node, the child’s life journey, decisions, successes, and failures will be recorded and archived for possible future study (Emeagwali, 2006). Effectively, human beings will become the bedrock of the interlinked world, seamlessly linked to central hubs and repositories. When this happens, desktop and laptop computers will become obsolete and disappear into the Internet (as is happening in cloud computing), and fifty years later, the Internet will also become obsolete and disappear into humanity. After that transference into humanity, the only aspects that will remain are the nodes, which are actually people, and they will be forever connected in order to work together" (pp. 35-36).

References

Emeagwali, Philip. “Intellectual Capita, Not Money, Alleviates Poverty.” Daily Motion, 2008. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x45yrw_intellectual-capital-not-money-alle_news#.UQX9rUo4I4k (accessed January 2013).

---. “The Internet as an Emerging Global SuperBrain.” Emeagwali, http://emeagwali.com/essays/technology/weather/computing-the-weather.html (accessed June 1, 2010).

The First Family and Their Cell Phones

On January 21, 2013, I sat glued to my television and computer screens while watching the pomp and ceremony of Barack Obama's 2nd inauguration. Of all the events, I was most drawn to the inaugural parade. For about an hour, I had the pleasure of catching a unique glimpse of the family's down-to-earthiness. I also got a chance to completely geek out while watching Sasha, Malia, the First Lady, and President Obama use their cell phones.

Though this written observation is retrospective, I was able to look back at YouTube videos, Instagram and Twitter photos to notate the activities and approximate frequency with which the First Family used their mobile devices. It was fascinating to watch Sasha and Malia play on their phones. The Obama girls held their cell phone for most of the parade (which lasted roughly 1 hour long). The cell phone appeared to be an integral part of the family unit. I am reminded of Sharples, et al., discussion about cell phones in that they function as tools or “interactive agents in the process of coming to know” (pg. 7). It can be argued that this moment was a coming to know experience for the Obama girls as they snapped several pics of their mom and dad kissing, and took endearing photos of each other holding up the peace sign and making funny faces.

Perhaps the most profound takeaway from my observation is recognizing that this humanizing moment between members of the First Family, and as witnessed by the American public, was enabled by a mobile device. While watching the First Family on their cell phones, I couldn’t help but wonder what they were looking at, who they were texting, what apps were they using to edit photos, and also about the security involved in keeping the First Family and the girls’ data ‘safe and private’. I also thought about how fitting it is that Barack Obama is the first wired president in history of the United States. Since 2008, Obama’s campaign has been credited with successfully using social and mobile media for fundraising and organizing. The Obama administration prides itself on connecting with Americans using Twitter, Reddit, and Google Hangout.

While there's much to celebrate about this unique moment in techno-history, I also wonder about the cultural politics of the First Family and mobile technology. So much is to be said for the relationship between technology and its presence in the lives of vulnerable populations, particularly poor people, young girls, and people of color. The visual representation of the First Family using their cell phones illuminates conversations about what, in fact, it means for a prominent Black family with two adolescent girls to engage with mobile technology during an historical and digitally social moment. There’s much to be analyzed.

References

Sharples, M., Taylor, J., Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a theory of mobile learning. University of Birmingham. UK.

Notes on J. Lave and Situated Learning Communities

Situated Learning Perspective, Ecological Theory for Learning, Networks, & Situating Learning Communities of Practice – (Barab, Lave) Barab, S. and M.W. Roth. (2006). “Curriculum-Based Ecosystems: Supporting Knowing from an Ecological Perspective” Educational Researcher, Vo. 35, No. 5, pp.3-13. June/July.

Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In L. Resnick & S. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63-82). Washington, DC: APA.

Summary of Situated Learning Perspective, Ecology Theory for Learning, Networks, and Communities of Practice:

Barab and Roth’s analysis of networks situates the environment at the center of learning. The authors demonstrate “the role of the environment in distributing cognition” (pg. 6). They breakdown the simplistic idea of applied knowledge by deconstructing networks with discussions about the ways in which agents (or learners) engage and participate within the environment; the tools they use, how resourceful they are with the tools, the ways in which agents “wax and wane” (pg. 5) within a particular network depending upon targeted goals and understanding. The network, the authors argue, “is bounded by its function” (pg. 6). That is, how agents participate and contribute to the network itself determines its overall function. The authors believe in participation over acquisition. They state, “[i]ntegrating this theoretical conviction into our argument suggests that knowledge acquisition may be overrated and that a more important role of education is to stimulate meaningful participation” (pg. 6).

Jean Lave, a social anthropologist, puts a social (and to some extent, a human) face on cognitive science. Her article on situated learning asks us to rethink the idea of learning as a “emerging property of whole persons’ legitimate peripheral participation in communities of practice.” She asks the question “why is learning problematic in the modern world?” and briefly outlines a historical perspective of Marxist social theory to explain 1) alienated conditions of contemporary life, and 2) how commoditize labor diminishes possibilities for “sustained development of identities and mastery” (pg. 65). From the onset, we understand Lave takes a social and cultural approach to cognitive science. As such, she critiques two genres of situated activity theory by introducing the theory of situative learning. The first, Cognition Plus View (CPV) locates situatedness in the individual, internal business of cognitive processing, representations, memory and problem solving, and cognitive theory. (This view has a fixed Cartesian view of the world). The second, Interpretive View (IV) locates situatedness in the use of language and/or social interaction. Meaning is negotiated [and] the use of language is a social activity rather than a matter of individual transmission of information, and situated cognition is always interest-relative. Unlike CPV and IV above, situated learning, according to Lave, “claims that learning, thinking, and knowing are relations among people engaged in activity in, with, and arising from the socially and culturally structured world” (pg. 67).

Lave discusses Jordan's 1989 ethnographic research on apprenticeship in the Yucatec Mayan Midwifery community (pg. 68). The apprentices in this community are peripheral participants, legitimate participants, and legitimately peripheral to the practice of midwifery. Community members of Yucatec Mayan Midwifery have access to broad knowledgeability of the practice of midwifery and to increasing participation in that practice (pg. 70). With this example, Lave argues against prior notions that teaching resources (in the Western sense) are necessary in order for effective apprenticeship. Though this community is impoverished, and despite a lack of identifiable teaching resources, Jordan’s ethnography shows that “learning activity is improvised” (pg. 7) and knowledgeability and an ongoing transfer of newcomers to oldtimes are established in this particular community. Lave’s discussion of Alcoholics Anonymous is also an example of a community of practice where newcomers gradually develop identities as nondrinking alcoholics—i.e. learning as legitimate peripheral participation (pg. 71). Both examples Lave mentions resonates with Jenkins' (2006) notion of affinity spaces (pg. 9) in a participatory culture, that is, spaces where informal learning communities acquire skills and knowledge through apprenticeship. These spaces, according to Jenkins, are powerful sites of generative learning where “aesthetic experiments and innovations emerge” (pg. 9).

Though Lave initially presents a “seamless whole” (pg. 74) of communities of practice, she also acknowledges that continuity and displacement (of oldtimers) are necessary for someone to become a full practitioner in a community of practice—a complex and muddy reality.

The crux of Lave’s article comes toward the end with further analysis on what Henning (2004) discusses of Lave as the commoditization of knowledge. That is, the commoditization of knowledge and learning results in the anthropomorphizing and objectification of people (Lave, 1991). People become products within an exchange system of learning (pg. 75). As a result, the learner, or agent “has little possibility of fashioning an identity that implies mastery [since] commodification of labor implies the detachment of the value of labor from the person” (pg. 76). In other words, personal identity, a significant factor in knowledgeability according to Lave “devolves elsewhere” or is lost.

Lave’s 1991 article as well as her work mentioned in Henning’s 2004 article, "Everyday Cognition and Situated Learning", establishes nicely the ways in which Lave puts a human face on cognitive science.