Paramore's "Misery Business" - A Sociological Analysis

Front stage and a back stage. When I heard of this, I thought of people who are always hiding their front stage with makeup. As a clear warning, I am not depreciating makeup in this post because I love wearing makeup, too. I am just referring to the girls who refuse to go out if they have no makeup on. That's a personal choice, but this video, "Misery Business" plays with this idea. In the video by Paramore, a high school girl walks through the hallways like a boss. She believes she is invincible by bullying and intimidating anyone in her sight. This continues until the last scene where Hayley Williams, the lead singer of Paramore wipes the makeup off her face. She breaks down, expressing humiliation and embarrassment. This is her back stage.  This is an example of how dramaturgy, a form of sociological analysis was expressed through a music video. 

The Lion King- Marxist Analysis

                                            


Through a Marxist lens, Marxism encompasses social aspects such as family structures, politics, and government, just to name a few. The film, The Lion King, is a perfect example of Marxism because  there are different animals that can be seen as different societal classes, though one animal that is prominent in most scenes throughout the film is the bird, Zazu. Zazu flying around the herd of all animals and above the lions symbolizes that animals can increase their societal status. The lions are seen as authoritative figures that make sure there is order kept amongst the animals in "The Pride Lands."

The weaknesses spotted in the film through the lens of Marxism are visible when the hyenas take over the power of The Pride Lands. It is evident that power was still not equal between all animals and an apparent inequality is shown when imbalance starts to cause chaos. When Scar finally becomes king of the lands, this is seen as a dictatorship. The first sign that this film can easily be analyzed through the Marxist perspective is the opening scene, "The Circle of Life". During the scene, you see all the animals lined up by their kind. With the lions highest in hierarchy (also highest in the food chain) holding their rightful place at the top of the rocks.

Narratives of Empowerment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43QTjFCPLtI

To examine feminist theory I would like to look at that advertisement call ‘Equality’ presented by Nike at this year’s Grammy awards and later at the NBA-all star game. In examining this ad I am less interest in the text itself, although it is an interesting ad and I would encourage you to follow the link above, but instead on the supposed representation of women’s empowerment that comes specifically from the inclusion of Serena Williams in the advertisement. Serena Williams has, for years now, been a celebrity elevated to the highest level of social empowerment. She is considered to be a roll model by many and the perfect image of an empowered woman by others. The issue I see is that advertisements like Nike’s ‘Equality,’ or most other advertisements, especially in sports, that present women through this narrative of empowerment fail to address the real nature of power in our world today.

First, lets examine the way in which Serena Williams has been presented as both feminine and masculine depending on the efficacy it provides to the consumer or producer. Despite being portrayed as the image of an empowered woman many critics, mostly scummy, racist misogynists if we are being honest, have suggested that she is not ‘feminine’ enough to be presented in this way. Of course there are multiple issue with this interpretation the least of which is the racial implication that her muscular form (also a symptom of being literally one of if not the best tennis player in the world) does not qualify her for the more traditional image of what a woman should look like. Naturally, this interpretation is also representative of an extremely sexist and patriarchal construction of the female from which is fundamentally wrong and dehumanizing. What is so unique about this scenario is that the act of empowerment comes precisely from the anti-normative construction of her body as an image of power. The problem is that in the attempt to subvert normative constructions of body image in order to empower less traditional concepts of body image, while connecting those less traditional images to empowerment. The question is why did it fail, the answer is that gaze has never been undermined. As much as it appears to be empowering for Serena Williams to be presented in these ads it is not only tokenizing but actually fails the goal of subverting traditional power structures. If the normative structure is a very limited image of women and power then it would be subversion to in some way dismantle that connection. Ultimately, I think that the link of not being able to dismantle the male gaze creates a problematic narrative for what women’s empowerment looks like. If we suggest that women can present themselves, or more accurately be presented (an issue in itself), as empowered regardless of the gaze enforced through norms then we are essentially suggesting that being oppressed is a choice that can be moved away from on a whim. This sounds like emancipation-philosophy entrapment and nothing more.

Stage and Political Spheres

To examine sociological analysis I would like to go back to the discussion that took place around the final presentation. In regards to President Trump the discussion surrounded the issue of stages and the means by which celebrities can, and must, market both their image and their reality to consumers. As a political candidate who's popularity disseminates from an almost cult of personality-like relationship with his supporters the issue of marketing was never a far off concern for candidate Trump. What he offered to his supporters was the chance to vote for an outsider, a person "just like them." In finding ideological similarities with his campaign supporters felt as though they gained a direct link to the presidency and the government. This link, this backstage pass-holder feeling, was emphasized by candidate Trump's constant Tweets and has been no less significant now that he has taken office. What I find unique about this situation is that rather than marketing his backstage life President Donald Trump is marketing backstage politics in the hope that people who feel left out up to this point will relate with and support him. This practice, while effective in gaining support and causing people to relate is, in my opinion, exceptionally bad for the political process; in the process of attempting to open the political process to more people political concerns become necessarily less potent, reason is lost in the name of ideological justification.
The current discussion of fake news is perfectly representative of the issues of framing mixed with the desire of the consumer to shift spheres. First, what is meant by the desire to shift spheres? Political discussions place us in different spheres in so far as different groups are able to access and discuss different issues in different ways. Some spheres of discussion, such as technical firms, lawmakers and elected/appointed offices, have barriers to entry, which prevent the public from entering the discussion. Other spheres allow for and even encourage public and open displays of opinion, which should, and to a certain extent must, be accessible to as many people as possible. What’s the issue? Placing politics in a technical sphere, such as the need to be elected to have a say in the construction of policy, limits the ability of many who are subject to those policies to have a say in their creation. (As a side note I accept that voting is an option but at this point the claim that voting gives you an equal say is almost as absurd and politically suicidal a position to take as the Gateway drug theory or trickle-down economics, so I won’t bother). The manner in which Donald Trump played the idea of the front stage and back stage issues is, I believe, perfectly representative of the desire of many to see politics move into the public sphere where they are not limited in their access and understanding of those politics. Donald Trump presented people an opportunity to engage with politics as back stage, as a real thing, as a public sphere. While this was incredibly popular it lead to extreme damage to our understanding of politics and our consumption of news, that is the major conflict today.
I was going to do a lot of work to try to prove these issues though some sort of sweeping examination of political prudence over the last 20 years but instead I will turn to the simple idea of junk politics. As much as I enjoy the technical issues being accessed by the public I also recognize that the public does not understand technical issues, sort of the point of a technocratic politician. There are two perceivable impacts from the mixing of political spheres in the context of Donald Trump marketing the back stage of his political journey: 1) Fundamental damage to our understanding of the issues and 2) Culmination in the election of a president who is fundamentally incapable of the work of technocracy and is only now starting to realize that political issues are technical regardless of whether we want them to be. The damage to our understanding of the issues is not only linked to President Trump but he is representative of the culmination of this failure to understand. Everything from the 24-hour news cycle and the way it must limit and gate-keep issues to the profit driven need to emphasize violence to gain attention display a system in which news has become more like entertainment. In that line news agencies must frame their issues in a way that people will pay attention; the unique thing about our new president is that he does that too. From the oversimplification of globalization that he used to paint China as a target to his simple idea of “just negotiating” with Kim Jong-Un, Donald Trump has simultaneously brought political issues into the public sphere while turning them into garbage that we consume while thinking that we are an informed citizen. I hate the reality that we live in where stupidity and ideological simplicity are considered to be informed citizenship but I want to use the last example of Kim Jong-Un to represent the real problem here. Not only do we consume political trash but we have, excuse me our new executive has, begun to practice politics like they are garbage. Donald Trump’s oh so brilliant plan to negotiate with Kim Jong-Un sounds good to a simpleton who believes that governments should be run like a business (i.e. Negotiate when you have the stronger hand). To a person who actually understands political technicalities, however, negotiation is, in and of itself, a bargaining chip to be given and withheld as a tool of diplomacy to discourage behavior. Essentially, my point is politics are complex and despite the fact that we might like more access to the ‘band’ we will probably not know what to do once we actually get there.

Target Toy Aisles

It's not terribly surprising that the toys children play with tell them how to act. During the formative times of childhood, just about everything is an influence. What's more shocking is that children's toys seem to tell adults how to act too. Or maybe not according to some. In this picture it's pretty easy to tell which toys are for boys and which are for girls. Although there's no specific label saying boys or girls above them, the aisles couldn't be more gendered if they tried. But for many people this is still an outrageous breach of morality. How will adults know what to buy if there are no specific labels? They could be color blind so they don't see the pink, and mute so they can't ask the target employees what toy to get, and they could be really drunk so they can't tell the difference between a barbie and a G.I. Joe, and if all of those were true they might get their kids the "wrong" toy. So many things in this picture tell us what we're "supposed" to do, but people are still up in arms because they want to be specifically told. Good news for advertisers though, instead of using subtext, just tell the customer to buy your product and many of them will.

Jayden Smith, son of famous actor Will Smith, has recently been in the news for wearing dresses, and other clothing articles that are created to be worn by woman. HE is not a homosexual, but many people do call him one. When he is doing this he is changing the way that modern society may perceive the way people dress and he is trying to show that just because people dress a certain way does not place them in a certain category of sexuality.

The way a female is portrayed in films has been pretty cookie cutter for years. How ever I think that in GI Jane back in 1997 brought up a topic that was not talked about to broadly and that was women in the military. I think the movie changed the way that people viewed woman in the military and wanted to enforce that women can contribute equally as much as men. Like many things in todays society people tend to just keep looking at them the same way they have for decades but this film brought up an important topic for woman and brought it to the fore front of conversation at the time.

Instagram: Sociological Analysis

Almost everyone has an Instagram these days, and what is becoming increasingly popular is more than one Instagram. Certain Instagrams are created based on certain roles a person has that they want to showcase to the public or friends. These different Instagram show different identities of a person. For example, I have two Instagrams and at one point I had three. Each of these Instagrams portrays a different identity and allows me to control what people see. I have a photography Instagram where I just post my photography to present myself as a professional photographer. I have another Instagram for my close friends, and the one that I do not have anymore was a personal one that was just me as Frances for a wider group of friends. On Instagram there are accounts for nearly anything. There are food accounts, weddings, travel, fitness, families, photographers, etc. Anything you want to see, you can, and they all represent a different identity of the account holder. A mom or dad, a fitness instructor, a cook, a traveler. Do we ever see the back stage of an Instagram user? Is anyone truly themselves? It seems that Instagram only allows people to have a front stage where they represent their different role they are trying to portray through photographs. People on Instagram are constantly working on and revising their self and their identity for their followers. Instagram is not for people that really want to get to know someone. It is to showcase certain identities and control what people see and what they do not see in relation to someone's life and their self.

Feminist Analysis of Undyne in Undertale

Undertale is a great game for many reasons, but one of the things I appreciated most about it is it's treatment of the character Undyne. Undyne is a fish monster knight with spears who pursues the main character for quite a while, trying to kill you. Undyne is undoubtedly the hardest fight that takes place in the first part of the game, and until I looked up instructions and realised I was supposed to keep running away, I died many times during it. Undyne is also a woman, a fact that is not at first noticeable to the player. We only realize this after she takes her helmet off. In this way, Undertale has created something rare, a strong female character who is not simply a show piece. Many games will have strong female characters but then spend the whole game going "Look, we made a strong woman, isn't it great?" which really breaks the immersion for me. By making Undyne a badass woman, and not rubbing our faces in it they give the idea that it is perfectly normal for a woman to be badass, not an oddity. It's the more perfect version of what Metroid was before the unspeakable Other M. 

Crash, a crime and drama movie that was released in 2004 that highlights racial tension between white and black, specifically tension between law enforcement and civilians. The movie also tackles many other social such as gender roles. The traditionally male movies roles are usually providers and protectors; we see something a little different in this movie. In one scene a black character named Cameron is pulled over by a racist police officer. Cameron's wife is with him, and soon begins annoying the officer and refuses to comply regardless of Cameron’s request. When Cameron responds without aggression as John searches his wife, she perceives him as failing to protect her. She later accuses him of allowing her humiliation so the people he works with wouldn't "read about him in the paper and found out he’s black". In the scene at the studio where Cameron works, this seems to be a fear, as he agrees to make a scene more racially stereotypical to please the studio. Fear of job loss did factor into his failure in his protector role. However, if Cameron had become unemployed, he'd eventually fail in his provider role. So he is torn between two roles, this role strain is shown though the racial discrimination he encounters. A void occurs between him and his wife after the incident.

Mac 'Vibe Tribe'

The photo above shows Mac's makeup line 'Vibe Tribe' which is as you can plainly see is inspired after native American culture. Mac is a very large and popular makeup brand. It is all too common for Native American culture to be inappropriately used as inspiration. Native American culture is one of the most common cultures to be appropriated and abused for brands on devices. Mac swears their 'Vibe Tribe' collection is not inspired from Native American culture. Although you can plainly see that this is not true. The packaged Native American culture and are mass producing it and selling it to the masses. This is something that happens often. Consumers were not happy with Mac for this line. Another example is Free People recently got in trouble for selling rain sticks, medicine pouches, beaded chokers, and spirit animals essential oils. Not only that, but Victoria's secret got in trouble in their 2012 fashion show in their calendar girls section for featuring a model in Native American costume with a headdress. They apologized and removed it from broadcast. Every year on Halloween people dress up in Native American costumes. Native American culture is one of the most culturally appropriated group of people. Native American's are not portrayed well in the media and their culture is often mass produced and sold.

Feminist: Two Broke Girls

Two Broke Girls is a sitcom that follows the lives of Caroline Channing and Max Black as they attempt to get their cupcake business off the ground and find financial stability. Caroline comes from an affluent background but due to her father’s involvement in a Ponzi scheme, she must get a real job. She then meets Max and the two work together as waitresses and become roommates. The show has gotten a lot of criticism because of the ways in which it reinforces some of the patriarchal notions that are seen as the “status quo.” Oleg, the cook at the diner where Max and Caroline work, is constantly shown harassing and berating the two with sexual innuendoes and this is seen as comic relief rather than an actual problem to be dealt with. Max is even shown sometimes thanking Oleg for his sexual compliments and that his comments are welcome and can help other women with their insecurities as well. 

Sociological: Mean Girls

Mean Girls is not only a large part of pop culture, even to this day, but it also is an interesting look at how we view and interact with certain members of society. When Cady Heron is first introduced to The Plastics she suddenly learns what a girl “should be” according to the girls. They are consumed with their appearance and value their sex appeal. While Mean Girls does a nice job of pointing out these stereotypes of women the movie doesn’t really do much to challenge or address them. The movie resolves with a notion that in order to be cool you have to be like the plastics. While The Plastics might think they are following the rules of feminism they are really just reinforcing the roles that society has set up for women and girls.  

Cultural: A Beautiful Mind

A Beautiful Mind is a biographical film based on the life of John Nash a Nobel Laureate winner in economics. The film was inspired by the Pulitzer Prize-nominated book of the same title by Sylvia Nasar. The movie did receive some criticism for the way in which it presented Nash’s schizophrenia. While the portrayal of the mannerisms of a schizophrenic individual was seen as extremely accurate by many psychiatrists the notion that Nash’s own willpower helped him overcome schizophrenia was farfetched and somewhat damaging. The film did not address how schizophrenic individuals manage their illness which if often down by a combination of medication and therapy, instead, it presented schizophrenia as something that can be defeated. This gives not only the general public but also schizophrenic individuals the idea that a recovery is an option when most often than not partial recovery is the best one can hope for.  

Marxist Analysis of Modern Family

Modern Family is a popular sitcom show on ABC Family. This show is about three families in the modern world. Each is different. It shows ethnicity, racially mixed households. It also shows a gay couple with an adopted daughter. This show breaks boundaries regarding portrayal of race, color, and sexuality, but it fails to address poor or working class people. Each family in this show is at least middle class and makes well above the average American. Money or struggling to make ends meet is never an issue at all. The problems that are addressed in modern family are uptown family with house flipping, college, or hiring a nanny. The gap between the working class and the rich are growing. What is shown in modern family is not the reality for most American's. Most Americans cannot even begin to imagine being able to afford the lifestyle shown on Modern Family. Viewers must identify the problems of the elite. The fact of the matter is the majority of families are poor. There are not many portrayals of the working class that are in a good light. Modern Family is no exception with money or poor people problems not being addressed at all.

Sociocultural Analysis- Undercover Boss

Undercover boss is a reality tv show that follows the CEO of a company that for a short time works in one of the jobs, as a new employee, the expect their employee's to do. In this show the boss meets some of the working class employees and is meant to show the divide between the boss and their employee's. This is an interesting concept because the employees do not know that the 'new employee' is actually their boss. The employees do not change their behavior and act as they normally would unaware. If the employees did know who the new employee is their boss they would act differently than they do in the show. By doing this the boss gets to see an employee's genuine behavior. The boss gets to see the employee's unrestrained backstage. This is not something that would usually happen. Employees unknowingly put their backstage up, which the boss sees. This sets up an unique opportunity. Those that are good employees are often rewarded by the boss on this show. This show is a break from the usual frontstage and backstage. When the boss is around undercover the employees are not playing the part of good employee in front of boss, which is rare.

Sociological Analysis: 13 Reasons Why

Netflix's original series 13 Reasons Why is about a young girl named Hannah who committed suicide and left thirteen tapes, with thirteen reasons as to why she killed herself. Each episode is a new reason about something someone did for Hannah to commit suicide. The show's producers wanted to create an awareness of mental health. I am going to use the Equipment For Living form to analyze this text through the sociological lens. The show is using a fictional story of a young teenage girl who committed suicide to raise awareness of the social issue of suicide. The majority of the show is flashbacks, giving the viewers the reasons why Hannah killed herself. The show helps us "size up" the situation of suicide and gives us strategies to respond to it. We see the motives Hannah had to kill herself and the show is made to help us in real life see those signs and symbols of mental illness before someone gets to the point of suicide. I think the show does a pretty decent job at showing the struggles of a teenager in high school who is being bullied, but it doesn't show any other generation outside of high schoolers. The show may be helping high schoolers to realize that their actions in their school lives can have affect on someone with a mental illness, but they don't show any other generation how their actions in a daily work life, home life, or adult social can have an affect on someone struggling with mental illness.

Sociological Analysis- The Bachelor



I think the Bachelor demonstrates a great example of sociological analysis. On a show like this, there are a lot of group dynamics that emerge from when people are isolated from their normal everyday lives. Its evident that people are selected for specific reasons to go on the bachelor and are usually slim, fit and attractive. It can almost in some ways be comparable to a cult or institution as they are cut off from the outside world and stuck in a mansion. Women are being selected by the producers to spend certain time with the bachelor and one women will be chosen as "the one". The show can be compared to the Stanford Prison experiment too, where people will change their behavior and expectations based on the setting that they are in. The women are not working and living in this fantasy world where its easy to become passive to what is really going on  and conform to the roles that they are given or fall into during the course of the show and at the end of the day the producers have defined their position for them. In the prison experiment, people who were prison guards fell into their role so easily and let go of their normal inhibitions which does occur to people on the bachelor.

Sociological analysis-Women in Military

As being a son of a family of father, grand fathers, and Uncle who was in the military I have heard all the different generations of military. From the line from all men to more women starting to be in the military. That women still get criticized to this day on who should be allowed to join the military is blasphemy to me. I believe if you really want to join the military and fight for our country you should have the right to do so without being judged of denied. It has been very small sample size of women fighting alongside the men in war. There have been women in war in WWI and WWII but most of them were not with men in the smaller areas or nurses or cooks. So for women to be in combat is a more of a hot topic discussion. In 1993 after a vote 63 percent of the military were open up to women. Just last year they finally open up all combat jobs to women. As they were very limited to what job they can do in war. Women should be allowed to do this years ago as if you feel ready to fight for our freedom why not. Why was it okay to let men go over and sacrifice their lives but women not. Women are just as powerful as men are there is still the stereotype of women are weaker then men. Which is completely false some women have more balls then some men in war do or in the higher position in government for war. It is funny though the people saying women should not go to war are the men sitting at home and being to scared to go to the war themselves, so unless you have the balls to do it your self then shut up. Women should just be on the front lines as much as men are on that line of sacrificing your life for our freedoms.

Psychoanalytic: Scandal

Scandal is an ABC drama about Olivia Pope who is a "Fixer" in Washington D.C., basically if there is a problem with a major politician she is there to put out the fire. But the real scandal is that she is having an affair with the president of the United States. Living in one of the most power driven states, the audience sees that power is what Olivia craves. If she is not with with the president she starts to date the next up and coming senator or the director of the NSA. We learn that Olivia has a deferral in her pursuit of power. Each man she is with can never give the end satisfaction she looks for. When it becomes okay for her to date the president, she is not satisfied and ends up leaving him. The desire for what she thought it would be did not match up to the reality of what it was. 

Feminist: Ghostbusters

The 2016 remake of the popular film franchise Ghostbusters, first sparked some outcry when the cast the cast was announced.Why? Because it was all female. The 2016 remake starred  comedians Melissa McCarthy, Kate Mckinnon, Leslie Jones and Kristen Wiig. In a society where remakes are looked up on with harsh criticism, this remake was also looked through with a fine tooth comb because it was a female cast. Some say the movie was not as good as the original, but what movie is? The movie grossed almost double the cost to make the film. This movie broke many gender stereotypes. First the women scientist, women are usually not portrayed as scientists in film and if they are it is somehow sexualized. Another way they broke down gender barriers was not needing help from men, the one male main character played by Chris Hemsworth, is the ditsy secretary usually played by a female. The other way this movie plays as a trailblazer, is in the casting and writing. The writting showed that women can be funny in film and that a man is not needed. The casting also shows that you don't have to look a certain way to star in a movie.

Pride and Prejudice - Sociological Analysis

I picked this movie, first because I just love it, but second because I think it does a great job of showing how people interact with their surroundings based on how they interpret the world.  This story follows several characters from varying socioeconomic standings in English society in the 1800's.  These characters, throughout the course of the story, must confront the ways that they interpret their worlds and must reassess their outlooks.  The main two characters, Elizabeth Bennet and Mr Darcy, are both prideful and prejudicial - but their outlooks in this way are incredibly circumstantial to the ways in which they were raised and their current surroundings (it takes their meeting to change each other's perspectives).  Elizabeth is a child of a lower, middle class family struggling to secure their future.  Mr Darcy, in contrast, comes from a very wealthy family, but that has been through periods of betrayal at the expense of the ones he loves.  The meanings and value that these two both place in their worlds revolve around family and protecting the ones they love. Initially these two do not like each other, but after slowly learning of each other's loyalty and integrity towards their family, they come to respect and eventually love one another.  Both of these characters are guided by strong values and connections to family - that is what drives them and that is what the overarching message of the story comes to be, that family is essential.