ENVS 204B Media Ecologies and Cultural Politics Assignment: CRITICAL MEDIA ANALYSIS I. General Expectations Students are expected to carry out, individually or in small groups, an in-depth critical analysis of a media object/text or set of media objects/texts using analytical methods from the course. This will take place in stages, as follows. a) A 1 to 2 page proposal (worth 5%) will be due in class on February 19. This should outline the object of your analysis, your specific method(s) of analysis (please see below), a rationale for choosing this method in relation to your object (with reference to other literature, if relevant), a description of the format for the analysis if is not a traditional written paper, and a description of the distribution of labor if you are working in a group with other students. b) The analysis itself (worth 15%), due on or before March 19. This should include all the components of a scholarly paper, as outlined below, but its format can be either a regular paper, a web site or series of web pages, or an alternative format as proposed and approved by the instructor beforehand. The scholarly components should include the following: i. An introduction or abstract stating the topic, thesis, methodology, and results/conclusions. ii. A description of the media objects under consideration, providing any essential background to understanding the object (no more than 2-3 paragraphs). If you are choosing an online format for your analysis, you may substitute this with directly accessible links (e.g., hyperlinks) to those objects. iii. An in-depth analysis of the object as a form of social and/or environmental communication or as a media-ecological intervention, using some clearly defined analytical method(s). This should be the longest section of the assignment. iv. Full bibliographic information on all relevant sources, in APA, MLA, Chicago style or another academically recognized style (except where web links may suffice). Suggested length: This will depend on the format and the number of students involved. For individual written papers, it should be roughly 1200-1600 words; for multiple-authored work it will be longer. c) In-class presentation (worth 5%), to occur most likely on March 19 or 26. II. The Details The Object of Analysis The object of your analysis can be any media-based environmental (or social-political) activist campaign, action, event, or advocacy organization or group. Please be sure not to choose something too large. For instance, Greenpeace (as a whole) is too large – it has a long history and many local, national, and international chapters; but Greenpeace USA’s anti-GMOs campaign may be doable. See the list of “Some possible topics for projects & analyses” on the Blackboard course web site for ideas. Analytical methods Please use the following overarching theoretical framework to organize your thinking about your media object. Within this theoretical framework, called a “Cultural Circulation” model, there are two sets of axes (each articulating different options) for focusing your analysis. Axis 1: Analytical perspective 1) POLITICAL-ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE: This approach focuses on matters of wealth and power; for instance, on media ownership and control, inequalities in access and distribution of media or their control, and so on. 2) MEDIA-ECOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: This approach combines a focus on the technological medium in question and the ways in which it rearranges temporal, spatial, social, perceptual, and material-ecological relations among the parts that it brings together (e.g., in its production and consumption). 3) CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE: This approach focuses on the cultural relations – i.e., the relations between different groups of people as characterized by social class, race, gender, ethnicity, religion, nation/region, or other dimension of cultural identity and difference. Axis 2: Moment in the Cultural Cycle 1) PRODUCTION: The “moment of production” is the point in the cycle at which a media object or form is produced, both socially and materially-ecologically. Focusing on this moment requires discussing the various contexts and constraints – e.g., political, social, material, and ecological – that have shaped the given media object. 2) REPRESENTATION / TRANSMISSION / TEXT: This is the “moment” at which a particular media object is displayed, represented, or transmitted to an audience. An analysis that focuses only on this moment typically treats the object (e.g., novel, film, poem, etc.) directly, without reference to how it was produced or to how different audiences make sense of it. The focus of this method is often on narratives, images, discourses, and representations found within the media object. 3) RECEPTION: This refers to the actual reception, “consumption,” or use of the object by individuals or groups, i.e., by specific, real audiences. Audience studies often examine how particular groups of people (e.g., subcultures) make use of particular cultural or media texts. (Sometimes media analysts refer to a fourth moment of REPRODUCTION, when the meanings received from some media object are in turn disseminated and circulation into the broader social world. We will consider this moment as part of #3 Reception.) Focusing on all of these moments through each of the perspectives would likely create a project that is too large and involved for a class assignment. So your task is to choose at least TWO of the perspectives and at least TWO of the moments. Your selection of these should depend on what makes most sense for understanding the object: what would be most interesting for our class to look at, etc. Your proposal should make a case for your particular approach. THE CIRCUIT OF CULTURE (or ‘Cultural Circulation’ framework) This framework for media analysis typically studies the ‘social life’ of the meanings carried by cultural products and texts. The following diagram depicts the cultural circuit model, but adds reference to approaches taken in political-economic studies, media-ecological studies, and ecocritical studies of media. Moments in the cultural life of an object: (based on the ‘cultural circulation’ models of Stuart Hall, Richard Johnson, et al.) (1) PRODUCTION Meanings are encoded into a cultural object (e.g., the production of a TV show or movie) CIRCULATION TRANSMISSION REPRESENTATION (2) THE THING ITSELF (TEXT) The object gets transmitted to a set of audiences through a ‘text’, performance or representation (the show or movie itself) (3) USE RECEPTION CONSUMPTION The text gets decoded by specific audiences / readers / viewers REPRODUCTION (4) LIVED CULTURES The consumed meanings in turn enter the social world from which further encoded products (news events, art, fiction, etc.) are created … The model below, developed by DuGay, Hall, Janes, Mackay, and Negus (Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the Sony Walkman, 1997) recognizes the more complex interactions between all four moments plus a fifth moment, that of regulation. In the case of the Sony Walkman, for instance, the production of the Walkman is influenced by the evolving identity of the Sony corporation as a global entity; Sony's strategy of synergizing ‘cultural hardware’ (the Walkman) with ‘cultural software’ (the music listened to on the Walkman) combines the processes of production and consumption. Walkman users have shaped the meaning of the Walkman as a cultural object, just as has occured with the I-Pod more recently. Because products like the Walkman, I-Pod, ‘boom-box,’ Hummers, et al. are not only private commodities but also public, their use can lead to institutional usage regulations, which in turn affect the design and production of the objects. And so on... QUESTIONS TO ASK WHEN DOING A CULTURAL/MEDIA ANALYSIS: A comprehensive cultural analysis of an object would focus on all of the areas listed below. The following are some questions such an analysis might ask. This list is organized according to the three “moments” of a culturalcirculation analysis. Remember that you should also be choosing to focus on political-economic (wealth and power), media-ecological (technology and “nature”), and/or cultural (sociocultural difference) dimensions of these moments. These are listed all together in what follows; it is up to you to decide which specific questions are relevant to your selected methodology. (A) PRODUCTION:  What are the significant social, cultural, and/or political-economic contexts within which this ‘object’ (e.g., film, song or album, ad campaign, app, web site, etc.) has been produced? Who produced it, how was it produced, and for whom or to what end (or as a response to what)?   What production systems were utilized in making the object, and what is their ecosystemic impact? What were the structural determinants and constraints of its production context: i.e., the material means of production (money, technology; socially organized forms of human labor), the structure of the production context (e.g., with film this could be the Hollywood film industry, the international film festival circuit, the capitalist ‘free market,’ etc.)? How do these contextual factors shape or constrain the ‘message’ conveyed within the object? E.g., how does the ‘text’ reflect larger ideological and political-economic realities? How is it constrained and channeled by distribution & marketing arrangements? How has the object been marketed, distributed, and exhibited? Is it part of a larger industry or ‘product package’? How does this relate to matters of political economy, cultural difference, or media/ecology? What are the constraints and possibilities inherent in the particular cultural medium chosen by its producers? What are its operative and generic codes, its technical limitations, etc.? How is this media object indicative of a shift in “media ecologies” over time? How does it contribute to the rearrangement of spatial, temporal, social, or ecological relations in the broader world?    __________________________________________________________________________________________ (B) REPRESENTATION / TRANSMISSION / TEXT: (FORM, CONTENT, DISCOURSE)  Formal or technical codes & techniques: Each medium has a different set of techniques and codes. E.g, in film, this might include basic narrative styles (genre forms), acting styles, camerawork (color vs. black-andwhite, camera positioning and movement, composition styles, lighting techniques), mise-en-scene (composition of elements within the frame), montage (editing), sound & music, etc.  Genre: What genre does the object belong to (e.g., in film, this could be a Western, a musical, a documentary, and so on)? How does it fulfill or deviate from the expectations of the genre? (E.g., if a Western, are there clear heroes and villains, as in a traditional John Wayne movie, or are the characters more ambiguous?)  Narrative form: What kind of story is told? What happens, and to whom? Who is the subject or active ‘agent’? How is the story told? What is the structure of the narrative – i.e., how could its ‘skeleton’ be portrayed? (E.g., a common narrative structure follows the following form: Equilibrium → Disruption by the appearance of an opposing force or problem → Search/quest addressing the conflict → Restoration of (previous or new) equilibrium.)  Structural and semiotic/linguistic ‘codes’ and discourses: What recurrent images and textual tropes are emphasized (i.e. recurrent ideas & devices, figures of speech, metaphors, equations, metonymies i.e. part standing in for whole, etc.)? What meanings are created through the combination or juxtaposition of elements (e.g. words, images, sound, narrative structure, etc.)? What are the ‘oppositions’ that structure the text – e.g., how do basic dualisms (good/bad, male/female, white/black, rich/poor, et al.) map onto each other – which ‘goes with’ which (according to the movie or text)? What is said and what is left unsaid?  Ideology and power: How are power relations and political agency represented? Are certain people/groups shown to be passive and others active, and, if so, is this presented in a critical light, or does it appear ‘natural’ and unchangeable? What dilemmas or problems are the characters faced with, and are the underlying structural causes highlighted or are these left unquestioned or unaddressed?  Representation of cultural and other differences: How are the following represented: o Gender and gender relations? o ‘Race’ and race relations? o Socioeconomic class? o Ethnicity and cultural identity? o Sexuality and sexual orientation? o Normalcy and deviance? o Nonhuman nature (animals, specific landscapes and places) and human-nature relations? o What is represented as ‘natural’ and/or ‘unnatural’? o What capacities for action are portrayed, and how are they distributed between different actors? Note: In literary and cultural analysis, specific critical approaches, such as psychoanalytic, feminist, Marxist or ecocritical forms of analysis have been developed to focus on specific categories and meanings from the list above (i.e., personal psychological meanings, gender representation, class representation, images of nature and environment, etc.). For this course, you may focus on whichever you think are most relevant, but if you choose to do a textual analysis you should normally at least include the ‘ecocritical’ questions: i.e., How is nature represented? How are relationships between humans and nature represented?  Intertextual comparison / context: How is it similar/different in relation to a larger body of cultural forms (a genre, works by the same ‘author’, similar images in different media, etc.)?  Context: Are there contradictions between the text’s overt message and its context (e.g., between a magazine article and the ads surrounding it, between a TV program and the commercials which disrupt it, etc.)? __________________________________________________________________________________________ (C) RECEPTION / CONSUMPTION:  Audience: Who are the intended audiences and what seems to be assumed about them and their expectations?  What are the ‘reception contexts’ – i.e., is the object part of a larger genre that has become popular? Is it part of a larger phenomenon of cultural experience (e.g., ‘going out’ to a film or art gallery, sitting at one’s computer terminal, etc.)? If so, what is the nature of that experience? (E.g., going out to see a movie is often both a very personal and very social experience: viewers take time out of our regular routine to sit with other viewers in a darkened cinema so as to immerse ourselves in a dream-like ‘other’ world for an agreed upon time.) How do these relate to sociocultural, political-economic, or media-ecological developments in society?  Reception history: How has the object been received, read, interpreted, used, inhabited, and otherwise appropriated into people’s lives? Has it been economically successful? Artistically successful? With whom has it been most popular (or unpopular)? What has been its appeal and ‘resonance’ for its audiences, and why? (E.g., does it offer reassurance of some sort? Is it cathartic, addressing people’s fears only to relieve them? Is its appeal voyeuristic? etc.) How has all of this changed over time?  What ‘resonant images’ and ‘myths’ does it draw on and articulate? (‘Myths’ can be thoughts of as culturally shared, compelling narratives that combine an understanding of how-things-are with a perception of their value.) What traditions or precedents does it follow (e.g. earlier films or novels, etc.)? What kinds of sentiments, emotional responses, etc. do these mobilize? E.g., if a film, does it draw on the popularity of ‘star’ actors and, if so, what do these actors represent to their audiences?  Identity: With and against which characters, images, personae, do you identify, empathize with, and cheer for? Which ones do you feel a desire for or an aversion toward? Why? What does this say about those characters or about you as a viewer? How does this vary for other viewers? What ‘subject positions’ are offered to the reader/viewer (see ‘interpellation’ below)? What subject positions are not offered?  Mood and sensibility: How do you feel while and after watching/viewing/reading this object? How are other people/audiences left feeling?  Studies of specific audience/reception cultures: How do particular groups of people (e.g. youth subcultures, ‘fans’) read, use, ‘take up’ different cultural forms (e.g. popular music, fashion, drugs, motorbikes, ways of behaving) to create their own subjectivities & identities (e.g. punks, riot grrls, rappers, metalists, gang members, anarchists, ‘anti-globalization’ activists, radical environmentalists)? How do the subjective forms (ideas, myths, etc.) presented by the object acquire a popular force, a force of ‘common sense’ or ‘givenness,’ or become principles of living, forms of lived commitment and identification, for specific groups of people?  What are their actual effects in social and/or ecological relations? Do they tend to reproduce existing forms of subordination or oppression (note: these can include relations between people and nonhuman animals), or hold down or ‘contain’ social ambitions? Or do they enable or facilitate the questioning or reframing of existing relations, opening them up in terms of desire, the imagination of alternative possibilities, etc.? GLOSSARY OF SOME USEFUL TERMS Anthropocentrism – the belief or ideology that assumes that humanity is more valuable than other organisms or species; the view that humanity is at the center of the ‘moral universe.’ Biocentrism – the view that all living things deserve equal moral recognition. Discourse – a structured system of linguistic meanings and codes, governed by rules and conventions. E.g., the ‘discourse of terrorism’ defines a particular phenomenon (‘terrorism’), specifies what is and what is not part of it, provides value judgments (‘evil’) and responses toward it (‘stamp it out’), etc. An alternative discourse applied to the same phenomenon might be that of ‘liberation struggle’ or ‘freedom fighters.’ Ecocentrism – the view that living communities (ecosystems, et al.) deserve primary moral recognition. Gaze – term used to refer to various ways of looking encompassed within the visual arts, such as the spectatorial gaze (audience members’ gaze, uninvolved, outsider’s gaze), intra-diegetic (gaze within the portrayed scene) and extra-diegetic gaze (gaze out of the portrayed scene, as when a character in a film looks toward the camera), direct and indirect gaze, and others. Various critiques have been developed to describe the effects of certain ‘ways of looking’; for instance, the imperial or colonial gaze is said to encompass certain ways of displaying (for the gaze) objects that are thereby subjected to colonial or imperial control by one who has power over those objects. Hegemony – ‘A conflictual process of everyday, lived practices that constitute, renew, and alter a culture’s shared reality, its common sense.’ A ‘moving equilibrium’ of generally accepted understandings (about politics, economics, social relations, the relationship between humans and nature, etc.), shaped in and through processes of articulation (the putting forward of meanings, embodied in images, narratives, discourses) by different social groups. Hegemony ‘implies a willing agreement by people to be governed by principles, rules, and laws they believe operate in their best interests, though in actual practice they may not.’ Heteroglossia – many-voicedness; containing a multiplicity of voices or perspectives (adj: heteroglossic); opposite of monologism or univocity. Interpellation – the process by which a particular kind of ‘subject position’ (e.g., ‘concerned citizen,’ ‘responsible parent,’ et al.) is constituted through a text or discourse; i.e., the text is directed to or ‘hails’ a reader or subject, providing a certain position into which that reader can insert him or herself. Interpretive community – a subset of society that shares a particular way of interpreting and understanding something. Metaphor – use of one thing to denote another because of some resemblance between them; e.g., ‘He is a fox’ (meaning: he is sly). Metonomy – use of one thing to refer to another because the first is significantly associated with the second; e.g. when the word ‘crown’ is used to mean ‘the king.’ Polysemy – openness to multiple meanings or interpretations (adjective: polysemic) Sign – anything that represents something else; something that carries a meaning. Signification – the process by which things (e.g., words) mean. Signified – that which is meant by a sign (see signifier). E.g., the three-letter word ‘cat’ is a signifier; a particular kind of furry, fourlegged critter is its signified. Signifier – the sign that means something. See signified. Synecdoche – use of a part or element of something to stand for the whole thing (e.g., when the New York City skyline or the World Trade Centre stands for the whole city of New York), or vice versa, use of the whole to stand for the part. Univocity – carrying only one voice; meaning only one thing (adj: univocal) Name 1 Your Name Professor Name Course 10 October 2015 Challenging Abusive Authority through Music with Pink Floyd I have chosen to analyze the song ‘’Another Brick in the Wall”, by Pink Floyd. As I will show, this song is not only a critique toward abusive teachers, but a call against abusive authority in general. The song is directed toward all of those who have felt repressed or sympathize with civil rights movements, and as I will argue, the song is successful at reaching its audience with its full meaning. Perhaps one of the most influential rock bands of the 20th century-and clearly amongst the most influential bands of psychedelic rock-is Pink Floyd. This rock band formed in 1965, in London, England, having as original members four singers-Nick Mason, Syd Barrett, Richard Wright, and Roger Waters; David Gilmour join the group two years later. The most successful song from Pink Floyd is without doubt ‘’Another Brick in the Wall”, which is separated in three parts, the second part being the most successful of all. Part One of the song talks about the father of Roger, father who left him to fight in World War II and was killed when the boy was five months old. Since Roger never got any memories of his father-just photos of him-it can be said that his absence has put a brick in his wall. This brick makes Roger to shut himself off from the world, to isolate himself. Name 2 In order to achieve an emotional awareness in the audience of the feelings Roger has for being upset with his dad for leaving him, Roger Water’s voice is highly intense. Roger particularly adds emotional intensity on the lyrics that describe his feelings of anger, which caused him to build a brick in his wall: “Daddy what else did you leave for me? /Daddy, what'd'ja leave behind for me?!? ”. Part 2 of the song is directed towards all individuals and things that didn’t allowed Roger to be the individual who wanted to be, that is, the people that made him feel that he is restricted. In order to describe the restriction he felt, Roger uses the analogy of the authoritarian teacher, who is too strict in limiting students’ behaviors and don’t let them be themselves: “We don't need no education/We dont need no thought control/No dark sarcasm in the classroom/Teachers leave them kids alone” . The analogy of the teacher is also an analogy for the figure of authority in general. For instance, the teacher can be seen as the government, and the children can be seen as the people. In Part 2 of “Another Brick of the Wall”, the authority figures are represented as figures that are people’s brick in the walls. Finally, in Part 3, Roger is telling himself and to the audience that he is capable of living without all the things that he has always wanted, such as love: “I don't need no arms around me”. He is also acknowledging that medication won’t help him: I don’t need no drugs to calm me”. He has made this wall to protect himself, and he doesn’t need anything or nobody to help him. Since the song is so popular, most people assume that they know what the song is about, and to what audience it is dedicated. Because the most obvious message of the song is that teachers should not abuse authority and limit students within a dogma, it might be assumed that the target audiences of the song are the students. Nevertheless, I believe that while the students Name 3 can identify themselves with some elements of the song, the target audience is the people in general, perhaps more so those who feel that they are being limited by their government. The authoritarian teacher is clearly an analogy to a repressive government that controls the life of their people in an abusive way. This analogy became clearer when the song was remade, with the occasion of the falling of the Berlin Wall (Manning 45). . I believe that the song was successful at reaching its target audience, because it was released during the Cold War, in a time when many people felt repressed under regimes that were labeled as socialist but had the authoritarian organizations that resembled in many ways fascist states. Many people living in the so-called ‘’free world’’ were also able to identify with the song, as much of the Pink’s Floyd audience were people that participated in the cunterculture movement of the 60’s and the 70’s, and had a particular experience with oppression of civil rights by the government. Those who believe that the song didn’t managed to reach its target audience might argue that 1) the song couldn’t be listen in the countries that were under formal authoritarian regimes, and 2) that the western audience didn’t understood the full meaning of the song, thinking it was only about authoritarian teachers. Nevertheless, both arguments can’t be easily refuted. First of all, while many Western songs were often censured within the Communist countries, there were always underground radio stations and other means trough which famous songs from the West could enter in those countries (Manning 45); hence, there was a lot of audience that felt oppressed and had the potential to understand the meaning of the song. When it comes to the audience from the West, while it is true that many thought that the song was strictly about Name 4 abusive teacher, it can be argued that many of Pink Floyd’s fans were educated in Pink Floyd’s style and philosophy, and hence, understood the full meaning of the song. In conclusion, the Song “Another Brick in the Wall” from Pink Floyd is a song about abuse and repression, whether it happens in class or it happens at a wide scale. The song does not makes a direct references to oppression, but it uses analogies such as the authoritarian teacher and its students while it describes the emotional and physical elements that created Roger’s symbolic wall. While the song was not always listened by all the groups which could have identified with the song, nor it was always understood, I believe that the arguments brought in this paper properly defend the idea that the song was successful to reach most of its target audience. Name 5 Works Cited Manning, Toby. The rough guide to Pink Floyd. Rough Guides, 2006.
Purchase answer to see full attachment