Friday 15 January 2010

D&AD Resistance



This is a draft of one of the A3 pieces I'll be submitting as part of my entry - originally this was just a rough draft to work out the layout, I considered writing it out again in black/yellow but to be honest I think this is far more visual. Turns out I ask a lot of questions, who knew..


Task 3 - Essay Proposal

Provisional Essay Title:-

Using the theories of Michel Foucault, discuss one example from modern society that is, in your opinion, panoptic.

Main issues addressed by your essay and the thrust of your argument:-

Panopticism - explaination, identify religion as my example.
God is said to be omnisient - constantly monitoring our behavior.
No need for physical punishment - reliant upon the threat of the afterlife, heaven/hell.
The presence of God can never be proved or disproved - uncertainty creates 'docile bodies'
Religion is not forced upon us - we are raised to believe it is 100% natural, myth.
Constantly enforced through public holidays, iconography, symbolism.

What Visual Material will you look at?

Jeremy Bentham's design - The Panopticon.

What theoretical perspective/methodologies will you use?

Myth/Ideology/Panopticism

Which specific theorists/writers will you refer to?

Mainly the works of Foucault who originally developed the theory in his book Discipline and Punish.

Books/Articles/Resources Already Located:-
  • Foucault, M. (1975) „Panopticism‟ in Hall, S. and Evans, J. (1999) Visual Culture: the Reader. London, Sage Publications. (306.23)
  • Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison. Harmondsworth, Penguin. (306 FOU)
  • Horrocks, C. and Jevtic, A. (2004) Introducing Foucault. Cambridge, Icon Books. (306 FOU)

Sunday 3 January 2010

Lecture #6 - Globalisation, Sustainability and the Media





Totally forgot to upload these bad boys!

Avatar


Just before Christmas I went to see Avatar (in 3D of course), not because I wanted to - the trailers had little to no effect on me - but because I felt the world was pressuring me into it with all the 'OH MY GOD, IT'S THE TITANIC OF OUR TIME' and the ever present 'HE HAD TO BUILD HIS OWN TECHNOLOGY, IT TOOK HIM THIRTEEN YEARS'... right, and?

Initial expectations were that of a typical other world action movie - lots of alien vs. human action scenes and some jazzy 3D effects thrown in there for good measure. And I suppose it was, to an extent, but to me it wasn't at all like the trailer had portrayed. The whole film was one giant metaphor for globalisation, set in a time where western civilisation is not only trying to establish a standardised international culture, but an interplanetary one as well. The plot was quite deep and provided a direct comparison of the greed fueled military superiors acting on the best interests of corporate society and the Na'vi (the native alien humanoids) who's entire way of life depends on their incomprehensible relationship with nature and a respect for their planet.

Basic story line - Americans move in; Americans want natural resources; natives happen to live on natural resources; Americans try teaching natives to speak English, give them clothes, bribe them out etc; when all else fails, Americans force them out. Pretty standard really, but the depiction of the Na'vi is almost saying 'well if humans were actually more like this we wouldn't have these global conflict problems and our environment might still be intact.'

It got a bit sickly at times and to be honest I still can't work out if I actually like the film or not, which is odd, but I am glad I went to see it - and it does make America look like a bit of an inconsiderate prick.