What is Hollywoodisation?

“Today we are seeing a partial erosion of the boundaries that once separated Hollywood from local Asian film industries, and a consequent intertwining of industries on both sides of the Pacific” (klein, 2004). Asian films are beginning to use special effects big budgets and big stars and Hollywood films are starting to embrace anime, kung-fu, and impressive stunts, “Hollywood is becoming Asianized in diverse ways, while Asian film industries are in turn becoming Hollywoodized.”(klein, 2004).

We are beginning to see not only the different styles of filmmaking erode and intertwine with each other we are also seeing the celebrities blend between both Hollywood and Asian film industry, people are becoming global celebrities as opposed to Hollywood or Asian celebrities. Just as Jackie Chan has broken into Hollywood films actors such as Daniel Craig are beginning to star in Asian films, such as ‘howls moving castle’.  The film industries are displaying a perfect example of globalisation, in full swing, and the “asian film industries are not so much resisting globalization as learning how to turn some of the transformations it has unleashed to their own advantage”.

In recent years we have seen multiple asian styled filmed receive box-office success as well as critical acclaim in Hollywood, with films such as Crouching Tiger Hidden dragon, Kung-fu hustle, fist of fury and shaolin soccer just to name a few.

Why have these films, of all the other asian films, had success in Hollywood? The answer is quite simple, and it has a lot to do with globalisation.
globalisation is all about combining cultures and therefore broadening cultures, and this is essentially why these convergences of different styles of films has had success, as they combine multiple demographics thus expanding their viewership.

I am a self-aware, self-indulgent, tech-savvy slave of the “specular economy”, but who am I?

Identity formation is supposed to be a “process in which individuals are self-aware” (David Buckingham, 2008) an opportunity for people to experiment and explore themselves to discover who their one true self or true identity is. With social networking playing a major role in the new generations lives, it appears we are approaching something David Marshall (2010) calls  the “specular economy”, where collectively we are becoming more conscious of how we present ourselves and how others perceive us…”. While being self-aware and creating identities is nothing new, “Where the specular economy differs is in its new reconstruction of how the self is reconstituted through the screens of engagement and interactivity…” (Marshall 2010)

I myself am a twitter user, and I have two different twitter accounts, one for socialising and one for professional purposes; Essentially I have created two separate identities for myself, and while aspects of my true self are presented on each account, some traits of my true identity have also been excluded on either account for either social or professional reasons, therefore depicting two different identities.

 “Identities are formed both from within and from the outside, in a complex interplay of mutual recognition and understanding of self and others” (FORNÄS, J, & XINARIS, C. 2013) and I have taken this in to account when creating my professional and social personas through Twitter.

who would you employ?

What is interesting about online identities and specular economy is that while they do play a role in creating a perceived image of oneself it is not ones true self being displayed. As being self-aware and creating a persona online means you have chosen what aspects of you to display immediately making your online persona not you, but your ideal self, which is not true to life. So is creating online identities and personas all in vain or can they really change who you are and how you are perceived in a real life context?

Buckingham, D (2008). "Introducing identity." Youth, identity, and digital media pp1-24.

 

FORNÄS, J, & XINARIS, C 2013, 'MEDIATED IDENTITY FORMATION', Javnost-The Public, 20, 2, pp. 11-25

Marshall D, 2010, the Specular Economy, Society, Vol.47, no.6,pp498-502

 

 



Reading in to Gaming

According to Stuart Hall (1973) there are 3 types of reading strategies used to interpret texts, dominant-hegemonic reading or preferred reading, the negotiated reading and the oppositional reading. Depending on which method you choose in which to interpret a certain text plays a major role in how you see the world.

Hall (1973) defines each of the readings as follows;

Preferred reading- “the dominant of preferred reading has the whole social order embedded in it…” it is basically the natural reading of a text, something we don’t have to think about and is just accepted by our social order and past experiences.

Negotiated reading- Acknowledges the legitimacy of the hegemonic or preferred definitions yet at the same time changes the rules and allows for logic, reason and personal opinion to put the text in to context and change the reading, not merely accepting the preferred and dominant reading.

Oppositional reading- “viewer perfectly understands both literal and the connotative inflection given but chooses to decode the message in a globally contrary way. [The viewer] detotalizes the message in a preferred code in order to retotalize the message within some alternative framework or reference.” Basically ignores all preferred and negotiated readings and chooses reader chooses how they want to receive the message.

One of recent history’s most controversial video games is Rockstar games ‘Grand theft Auto’ (GTA), which deals with drugs, sex and violence in a more participatory manor than any game before it. So when discussing different ways to read texts there seems to be no more fitting example than the racial stereotyping that occurs throughout the game.

Within GTA there are many representations of gangs and, unequivocally, all the different gangs are segregated by race, there are Hispanics, African Americans and Irish, just to name a few. Each representation of race in GTA is shown adhering to the white bred American society's stereotypical view of that particular race. The Hispanics drive low rider cars, have tattoos and wear bandanas; the African Americans wear baggy clothing, carry around guns and swear a lot; and the Irish drink, swear, talk a lot and have red hair. Using the three reading strategies these representations could be read either as true to life, partially true to life or as totally wrong.

 While none of these readings would be incorrect, it is pretty clear to see that to merely accept these representations would be morally and socially wrong, if you have any culture about you at all.  After reading Halls article and discussing the reading strategies I am now asking myself “is GTA racist?” And one would have to say yes, GTA is horribly racist. The stereotypical representation of race in GTA is a hindrance to the progression of the human race and is quite disturbing.

Blogging: democratic fuel or fire?

The internet is often described as a democratising force, however Kawamoto (2003) argues that “In a world of electronic information systems, communication becomes commodified and privatized; rules and regulations are driven by an increasingly powerful private sector; technologies can be used for surveillance and control; and democracy and diversity suffer…” despite technologies ability to give everyone a voice and platform in which to speak their mind. 

“Technology is often viewed as a key driver of change in the electoral debate” (Olorf and Moe, 2011) and twitter is a widely used source of technology when it comes to political discussions. Due to Twitter’s short and sharp micro-blog style it allows for everybody to participate and understand, despite their political knowledge or lack there-of.

According to Olorf and Moe (2011) blogging for political purposes does, purely in quantitative terms, contribute to the broadening of public debate, therefore having a democratising effect, however due to evidence being anecdotal at best, cannot be proven to have any effect on outcome of an election.

In 2010 twitter was examined in respect to an election in Sweden, over all a total of 99,832 tweets were analysed and while the study could not say whether twitter had any effect of the outcome of the election “a relationship between twitter and mainstream media” (Olorf and Moe, 2011) was uncovered…so is twitter and blogging a democratising force or merely re-enforcing the status quo?

One would hope that in a democratic country such as our own that Kawamoto is wrong, and I for one believe he is. The internet is a place where people can have their voice heard, make a difference no matter how big or small, a blog may just sway one vote or it could change the world (Julian Assange anyone?). No matter how small a difference, there is no denying the internet is a place where differences can be made and people have the power. to make them.

Innovators or thieves?

As a music lover  it seems like such a cop out, and to be honest pretty lazy, to merely sample someone else’s music and claim it as your own, that’s like taking a photo of the ‘Mona Lisa’ and claiming you as the artist because you added a filter…not exactly breaking new ground.  DJ’s and Mash up artists (the term artist is used very loosely here) should not be considered innovators at all, I even find it hard to believe they are considered musicians when their musical talents derive from the ability to play a song in conjunction with another, neither of which they created.

The sampling and mash up methods were developed in the 70’s where DJ’s would take popular songs and merely extend the most popular part of the song, and according to French intellectual Jacques Attali the listener became the operator (cited in McLeod, K. 2007) where“….anyone could compose music, regardless of whether they fit the traditional category of “musicians” or not. In the composition stage, the distinction between the worker and consumer, the musician and listener, was blurred…musicians no longer had the last word in their music” (McLeod, K. 2007) which seems completely unfair, the original meaning and message behind a piece of music is able to be completely altered in order to reach a new market and sell more copies.

In the  late 80’s digital sampling became a popular method for hip-hop artists and this method managed to change hip-hop music forever, it was for these brief few years that these "mash-up artists" could be considered innovators. however this did not last very long because in the early 90's when “copyright lawyers and major labels realized a whole new revenue stream could be opened up with a copyright-clearance bureaucracy"(McLeod, K. 2007) and hip-hop music would once again be completely changed.

“The minimum threshold one must attain in order to secure a copyright is to produce “an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression.”  In the realm of music, this would apply to any tune, lyric, or rhythmic pattern that has been either recorded electronically or written down.” (Varner, K, & Varner, E 2012) so it would seem that any song considered a “mash-up” would fall under this threshold, and because copyright law is put in place to benefit the original author, it would make sense that every snippet of a song used should have to pay royalties to the original creator, otherwise it should, and most likely would be, considered an infringement of the law.

These mash-up “musicians” and "artists" should be considered thieves, to an extent, they are blatantly living off other peoples talents, and they should most certainly be made to pay. The time of mash-ups and remixes has passed and it is now out dated, obsolete and detrimental to the development of new artists and music. 

Franzen, Benjamin 2010, ‘Copyright Criminals’ Independent Lense, PBS, Ford Foundation, University of Iowa

McLeod, K. 2007 Freedom of Expression®, the Book, Doubleday:  New York

Varner, K, & Varner, E 2012, 'ARTISTS "UNDER PRESSURE": COPYRIGHT ISSUES IN POPULAR MUSIC', Mustang Journal Of Law & Legal Studies, 3, pp. 31-41

EDWARD SNOWDEN; HERO, CRIMINAL, PATRIOT OR TERRORIST?

In light of recent events I have emailed the oxford dictionary in order to make a few changes to their next edition.

It reads:

“Dear Mr Oxford,

                           In light of recent world news I believe it to be appropriate to make a few changes to some definitions. I have attached some recommended updates below.

Hero:     1) a person, typically a man, who is admired for their courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities.

               2) Edward Snowden

Patriot: 1) a person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors.  

              2) Edward Snowden

Scumbag: 1) a contemptible or objectionable person.

                  2) Richard Murdoch

Hope you will consider this and it will be of some assistance.

                          Regards,

                                    Mitch op’t Hoog

P.S love your work”

While my humorous letter might be a slight exaggeration, there is no denying it has some merit. Edward Snowden is a true hero, yet thanks to government running and manipulating the media you may be lead to believe that Edward Snowden is a criminal and a terrorist, who has plans to communicate with Russia and china in an attempt to ‘take down’ the United States. This could not be further from truth, Edward Snowden is not a terrorist and he is not a criminal by any stretch of the imagination, Edward Snowden is a patriotic (ex) U.S citizen and a Hero in every sense of the word, and a modest one at that.

 “I don't see myself as a hero because what I'm doing is self-interested: I don't want to live in a world where there's no privacy and therefore no room for intellectual exploration and creativity.” (Snowden, 2013)

Now while Snowden claims his actions are in “self-interest” he is merely being modest and polite, as not only has he put his own life at risk, his actions (whether he has intended them to or not) have the ability to change the world and the direction in which the world is developing. Freedom of speech, thought and to privacy are things that have taken a long time to establish in western society and for the U.S government to invade privacy and violate these rights is a step in the wrong direction towards the unionisation of the world .

By blowing the whistle on the U.S government Snowden has put society back on track and done one the most patriotic and heroic acts ever witnessed. To label Snowden as a criminal or a terrorist for his act of ‘whistleblowing’ is plain and simple blaming the victim, which in any culture or society does not make sense. The only guilty party in the Snowden government situation is the government, their morals and ethics are very questionable...Snowden's most certainly are not.

Whether you believe Snowden is a Hero or a crook, there is no denying that his reason's behind whistle blowing are for the greater good of society. While he may be seen as a villain for turning on his own government, it was the government who first turned on him and the rest of the American populace. Snowden's courage and bravery are not traits of a terrorist or a criminal, but a man who would put his life on the line for a better world; a patriotic hero.

Beat The Problems out of Society

When I first heard the strained voice of Bob Dylan meaningfully informing me that “the Times they ar a Changin'”, my whole world was sent into a spin. I was 13 years old at the time and the only previous album I had owned was a poor excuse for music by Averil Lavigne (how embarrassing), so naturally when I first heard Dylan my mind was blown! You could hear he wanted to send a message to the world and to change the way people thought, he was singing for a cause. I delved deeper into the genius that is bob Dylan and discovered a whole generation of people using their talents in order to send a message and change ways of the world, people like Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac, William S. Burroughs and Joan Baez were all using their talents in order to create change and they were using their personas in order to create awareness, it was not only the first time I had been made aware of problems that occurred outside my own little world and my own culture, but it was also the first time I had seen that one person can in fact make a difference and bring about change for a better world.

Dylan, Baez and Ginsberg became major players in the anti-war movements  and pro-equality movements of the late 60's, they had managed to influence a whole generation of people into taking a stand and enforcing change for the better in the world. Although Dylan and his beat friends were relevant well before my time, it still made me aware that there were some serious problems in America and all over the world, and to my disdain they had helped me discover that these problems were still present more than 40 years after Dylan first sang out that the times they were a changing. While race inequality and war are still major problems in the world, The way Dylan used song to enforce change and create awareness and Ginsberg used poetry to protest changed the way of protesting and music for years to come.

 

Today you can see Dylan and the beat generations influences being extended further than just poetry and folk music and being carried over  in to musical movements such as hip-hop . Today you can hear in hip-hop songs the use lyrics and rhymes being used to create awareness and enforce change for a better America and essentially a better world, targeting a younger generation and focusing on relevant inequality issues of race, Gender and Sex.

Music has a special ability to make people connect despite cultures, countries, gender or even beliefs, it has the ability to create awareness and connect the world. Not only can music change opinions, emotions and even lives, but music can to change the world!