POST 16: Elephant, a Gus Van Sant movie (2003)

1) What struck you most in the film?
What struck me most in the film was when one of the killers killed his accomplice. In the previous scenes, we noticed that they were very good friends, they even had sex together and the fact that he shot his friend in cold blood shocked me. We saw that they were very close to each other and that they wanted to die together, but the death of Eric happened very fast and Dylan wasn't affected by what just happened and by what he had just done. Gus Van Sant said that he didn't want to represent the suicide of the two killers, but in my opinion, showing Dylan killing Eric was even worse. It shows how a man can be so ruthless and hearthless even towards his own friend. 

2) What also impressed you?
What also impressed me was the moment when Dylan and Eric were visiting a website where people could buy weapons. It seems so easy to order guns and to get them delivered a few days after. Even if I knew that guns were legal in the USA, I didn't know that it was so easy to get them. What I mean is, that they are minors and they weren't aware of the gravity of their acts. 

3) Did you find anything more particularly upsetting?
What was more particularly upsetting for me, is that when both killers got into the school with their guns, people were present in the corridors and they saw them, but they didn't react. It felt like if it was usual to walk with guns into a school. And what was even more shocking, is that the people who saw the killers didn't run away or scream. They acted as if everything was normal. 

4) What did you find very disturbing?
What I found very disturbing could be the very long film sequences, when for example, we follow the jock from the back for a very long time. Moreover, there is a threatening music during this sequence, which creates a lot of suspense. In fact, the viewer is waiting for the arrival of the killers since the beginning of the movie  and these long sequences hold him spellbound. 

5) What was most shocking?
What was most shocking was the choice of Gus Van Sant to show the massacre without any background music, only the sound of the screams and of the gunshots. The film director may have wanted us to live the shooting just like the students had. This scene was shocking for me because the lack of music shows how the killers are pitiless towards the students and the teachers. The aim was to make a very realistic scene, and without any poetry contrary to other scenes of the movie, when we were expecting this scene to be poetic in order to mitigate the violence of the massacre. 

6) What does the film suggest about the two school shooters?
The film suggests the desire of dying from the killers. Before going to the Colombine school, they knew that they were going to die and they didn't seem anxious about it. It may be because they don't care about life, they never assumed their own existence. They never found out who they really were, it seems like they are going through an identity crisis. In fact, this may be one of the reason that brought them to have sex together. Maybe by doing this they would learn something more about themselves. 

7) What's more, what does the film director make clear about the two killers?
This film didn't want to give a manichaean vision of the event. They aren't any good guys and bad guys, I mean even if John is depicted as an angel because of his blond hair and his pale skin, the killers aren't portrayed as the "bad guys". Even if what they did was terrible, Gus Van Sant showed them as sensitive people. Indeed, we see that Dylan plays the piano brilliantly and we can deduce that he's a normal teenager. Plus, the choice of showing the bullying that Dylan has suffered could probably explain the massacre, so the viewer would understand what generated the killers'violence. 

8) What kind of approach to the school shooting itself did Gus Van Sant opt for?
Gus Van Sant has decided to put the massacre at the end of the movie, so the viewer could get to know some students and the killers beforehand. In a way, Gus Van Sant wanted us to identify ourselves as the relatives of the victims : we get attached to the characters, and then they are killed, except John, and we feel powerless. The scene of the school shooting is quite shocking because it's very real, without any background music or film technique, except the slowmotion at the beginning. The death of Michelle is what opens the massacre and we are flabbergasted because we weren't expecting to see the blood, for example. Actually, the movie is full of poetic scenes and we thought that Gus Van Sant wanted to hide the violence of the massacre thanks to his poetry. 

9) Moreover, what's the main consequence of the realistic treatment he uses? What about the 'poetic' touches he instills throughout the film?
The main consequence of the realistic treatment he uses could be that the shooting becomes a lot more striking for the viewer.  The movie is full of contrasts because of the difference between the shooting scene and the poetic scenes. For example, after the death of the jock (the killers'main target), we can see a blue sky. Another example could be the scene where Dylan is playing the piano, and we can observe his room. Even when the movie shows the killers, we have some poetic touches, but when it comes to the massacre, Gus Van Sant wanted to show it in a very realistic way. Maybe he didn't want to lie to the viewers, he wanted them to see what really happened. It can also be considered as a sign of respect towards the family of the victims, because what happened was a tragedy and we can't deny that. 

10) As a conclusion, what must we admit about the way in which the killing and the killers are perceived by the film viewers?
Even if Gus Van Sant wanted to portray the killers as normal teenagers, the film viewer can't help to feel some kind of hatred towards Dylan and Eric. Plus, I don't think that Gus Van Sant wanted to defend the killers, on the contrary. If he chose to show us innocent people at the beginning of the movie like Michelle for example, it is to tell us that Dylan and Eric killed innocent people just for the pleasure of killing. Moreover, the actors playing the part of Dylan and Eric were smiling and laughing when they were shooting at people. This shows how all of this was a game to them. We can conclude that Gus Van Sant devalues the killers but in an implicit way. Maybe his aim wasn't to denounce the act of the killers, but to criticize the fact that in the United States, it is too easy to get yourself some weapons. 

POST 15: School shootings in the USA

   

 School shootings web site :

Interesting information :
Shooting at the Colombine High school on the 20 April, 1999 that causes the death of 15 people and injured 24 people. The school was filled with fear, chaos and panic. During the shooting, a teacher called 911 so they could hear the gun explosions and the screams. The audio of this phonecall is accessible on the website. The shooters were Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. They were two American high school seniors who got nearly graduated from the Colombine High School. They attacked their old school to take revenge on the people who picked on and snubbed them. They both died during the shooting.




The shooters : Eric and Dylan










 A photo of Jessica Holliday along with other students of Columbine High fleeing the school.

Rachel's coffin



One of the best film that can be related to this issue, in my opinion, could be April showers, that shows the Columbine shooting through the eyes of a survivor. This survivor is called Sean, who knew the man who shooted during the shooting. He's left speechless. This movie illustrates this issue because it shows how an entire life can be disrupted in just a few minutes. This school shooting had left deep scars in Sean's life and it will be difficult for him to get back to a "normal" life. It is important for students to see that movie because we feel identify to the characters of the film. It is a way to show to teenage people that they can be victims of those kind of things, even if after all we think that it will never happen to us, that it is impossible.

These are the reasons most commonly mentioned for the recurrence of school shootings in the USA :

1	They want to get back at those who have hurt them.
2	Other kids pick on them, make fun or them, or bully them.
3	They don't value life.
4	They have been victims of physical abuse at home.
5	They have mental problems.
6	It is easy for them to get a gun.
7	They do not get along with their parents.
8	They have witnessed physical abuse at home.
9	They drink alcohol or use drugs.
10	They do not have any good friends.
11	They see violence on TV, in movies, in videos, and in computer and video games.
12	Violence is a way of life in their neighborhood.
13	Other kids encouraged them to do it.
14	Their teachers don't care about them.
15	They are afraid of their own safety.
16	They are bored.

POST 14: Individual Documents on 'Spaces & Exchanges' Notion

To deal with the notion of Spaces and Exchanges, I'll start by giving a definition of both terms. First of all, a space is a geographical and symbolic area that all societies occupy and exchanges could be the interactions between men and different societies. Examples could be trade, globalization or the Internet. In fact, it is important to distinguish virtual spaces and real spaces.

Document 1 : Virtual spaces


Cartoon by Pawel Kuczynski (no more information found)

I've chosen this cartoon in order to represent the 'Spaces and exchanges' notion, representing virtual spaces. Indeed, Facebook is a virtual space since it is a social media that allows people to exchange between them despite the distance or any other obstacle. Pawel Kuczynski is a satirical artist who aims to criticize, through his drawings, nowadays' society. In this cartoon, the artist wants to show how Facebook is dominating people and how it has become the main manner to exchange. At first sight, it would seem that Kuczynski had the will to show the crowd as a kind of human tide, where people are forced to stay and stick together but only via Facebook. In fact, it is clearly shown that the Facebook logo is dominating this 'tide' because of his considerable size but also because he's represented as a submarine crossing the crowd. It seems to me that this submarine means that Facebook can see everything about everyone because the social media removes any kind of privacy. To put it differently, I would say that exchanges between people are forced because everybody is forced to witness everybody's life displayed on Facebook. This lack of privacy leads to different issues like bullying for instance. But we should not forget that social media like Facebook has positive sides because it allows us to stay connected to the world and to people who are far away from us.
To sum up, I would say that this cartoon shows one side of Facebook and social media in general, that it is a space that allows and almost forces people to exchange their lives between them, in any case the media remains a way to stay in touch with friends or family despite the distance.


Document 2 : Real spaces

This video was broadcasted by the NASA Climate Change on youtube, on the 4th of September 2014. This video, thanks to drawings, wants to convey a message in an amusing way, the message being : take care of your planet. It's a universal message for children, men and women living on earth, no matter their country of origin. The earth is a common space to all the people in the world, and that's why it is necessary to care for it. This video wants to show that every country can be united all together for a same cause : saving the earth. Events like the COP21 obliged in a way, some countries to exchange with others so as to fight global warming. This video is an example of how our space, earth, is threatened. In my opinion, is it imperative that countries talk to each other, to exchange aiming to find a solution to fight against these threats. An exchange between children and adults has to take place, so that they will be aware of all the earth issues from a young age. The NASA could also have exchanges with us, so we could, on a smaller scale obviously, save the earth. Anyway, exchanges between people are essential to be all united to save the earth. To sum up, I would say that the only way to save our space, is through exchanges.

POST 11: SPACES & EXCHANGES: ¿Qué? A cartoon by Nate Beeler (2007)

1) DESCRIPTION
We can divide this cartoon in two different parts. First, on the left, we can observe a cameraman from "TV News" next to a reporter talking through a microphone of the same TV channel. This reporter is wearing an elegant black suit and according to his facial expression, he looks very glad to talk to the "300 millionth American". His goal is to interview the man on the right. We can clearly notice the strong contrast between the American reporter and the man in rags. According to what's written in the speech bubble, we can deduce that he's not an American citizen, but a Mexican man. He only has a few belongings and because of the piece of barbed wire attached to his feet, we could say that he just crossed the border between the United States and Mexico. He looks completely lost and he doesn't understand what the reporter is asking him.

2) INTERPRETATION
First of all, it looks quite obvious to me that this cartoon aims to show that the majority of emigrants to the United States are Mexican people. But it is a well known fact that the American factories are located in the border area between the United States and Mexico. In fact, it's a strategic choice for the United States because the workforce is cheaper in Mexico. These factories are called "Maquiladoras", and the products coming out of them are exported to the United States. But this creates a paradox because the only things that can circulate are these products, not people. Even though, Mexican people manage to emigrate to  the United States illegally. In the cartoon, the man in rags could stand for all of those Mexican people who take risks to cross the border with only a few things to survive. Nate Beeler wants to criticize the miserable conditions of the immigrants when they come to cross borders. It shouldn't be illegal to immigrate to another country when you have to work without social security, in bad working conditons and very low wages.
The words of the American reporter shows how a huge part of American people are immigrants, and how they don't know anything about the English language. This could also mean that immigrants are not well integrated in their new country, and this creates social inequalities between native American people and South American immigrants. This imbalance is shown in the cartoon because of the difference between the TV channel equipment and the few items of the Mexican man.

3) How far does it illustrate the 'Spaces & Exchanges' notion?
This cartoon illustrates the 'Spaces and Exchanges' notion because it shows how moving from one place to another can be arduous and painful. Mexican immigrants have to deal with the space between Mexico and the United States they have to go accross, which is a dangerous thing to do. But then, they arrive in the United States hoping to have a better lifestyle and they're often marginalized. They don't have any type of exchange with American people. In fact, Mexican people represent a huge proportion of American inhabitants so they create a kind of Mexican comunity in the United States. They have the same culture as before, but in the United States. Therefore, they don't comunicate with American people and they don't exchange anything from their culture with them, because they may feel rejected by bornedAmerican people. To conclude, we could say that changing our spaces don't always allow us to exchange with new people.

POST 10 : TATTOOS & GANGS

Why do you think more and more people wear tattoos (regardless of whether they belong to gangs or not)?

At first sight, it appears that nowadays, wearing tattoos has become something fashionable. But we should not forget that for example, prisoners had tattoos to remain connected with the outside world, meaning that they'll write things like " For mum" or "To dad" for instance. And this kind of "ritual" has been preserved nowadays, mostly by men who call themselves "bad boys". They want to prove that they're tough guys and that you should not mess with them. Some tattoos can even become scary.  But according to many studies made in England, most tattooed people are suffering from personality disorder. In fact, they showed that women who don't qualify themselves as pretty, had the need of being tattoed. It could be a way to change their physical appearance, like to modify their body so as to fit better into it. Instead of modifying the entire body using plastic surgery for instance, being tattoed is an embellishment which aims to increase women's self-esteem. 

Thus, we should not forget that a tattoo can be considered as a work of art, like for example Tim Steiner's tattoo, situated on his back, displayed in many museums. His tattoo was sold for 150 000 euros. All in all, it would seem that a tattoo has a real meaning but it is, overall, an ornament for the body. 



Why do young people join gangs? 

Many times, children feel forced to become a gang member, because they live in fear on a daily basis and they may feel powerless against that fear. However, being part of a gang can give an impression of safety. Indeed, they learn how to use a gun, which gives them a feeling of power over everybody else. Furthermore, it is true that gang activities appear exciting to children and especially teenagers. Taking risks, feeling the rush of adrenaline, that's what they are looking for. It's a radically different lifestyle that can make them feel special and superior to  other "normal" children. Moreover, it appears that many of the children incorporating gangs come from single parent  families or broken homes , and the gang may act as a surrogate family because of the unbreakable link between all the gang members. On top of that, it is quite clear that a gang is a very easy and quick way to obtain money (thanks to drug trafficking for example) and this could be overwhelming for children. They may be offered more money for delivering a package or being a lookout, than their parents can earn in a week. In my opinion, it is undeniable that these children and teenagers don't realize that they will spend their entire life running from justice. For the time being, they're still young and they enjoy this feeling of being a kind of "thug", but when they'll become adults, the eagerness of building a family will be stronger than the gang's attraction and only at that moment, they'll regret the choice they made a few years ago. 

 
Gakirah Barnes, 17 years old. She was accused to have killed at least twice avenging murdered friends, the first time when she was just 14.

What link can you see between both topics and the notion of power?

According to my personal opinion, both a gang and a tattoo can have a power over somebody. Like I said previously, a tattoo gave a meaning to the prisoner's life because it was a way to stay related to the outside world and to keep hope. It also helps people to increase their self-esteem. Yet, it seems to me that joining a gang does the same thing. Actually, joining a gang may be a way to give a meaning to somebody's life, having a sense of purpose in life.
Secondly, it seems relevant to say that in some tribes like the Maori, the more tattoos you get, the higher social status you have. The leader of the tribe was the most tattoed. We can deduce that a tattoo is a mark of power. In fact, gang and prison tattoos have more in common with traditional tribal tattoos than they do with modern decorative body art. Each gang has their own symbol, generally tattoed on each gang member, so that the other gangs can recognize them. They also indicate your status in the gang, because the "black teardrop" tattoo for example, stands for a person killed or a stint in prison. Through this teardrop tattooed just below the eye, the gangster wants to scared the member of rival gangs and shows his power. Every gang member has a street name, tattooed on their body as well, because their nickname is more used than their real name. But this brings out the question, is power indelible just like a tattoo?  

POST 9: The Draw of 'Dead Town' - A Newsweek article (February 16, 2009) + GANGLAND Video

Go there for a full version of the Newsweek article given out in class.

Questions :

1. Gabriel Hinojos is an ancient member of the street gang in L.A. "Florencia 13". He wants to turn a new leaf, so he starts removing his gang tattoos : "There is the name of his gang, Florencia 13 or F13 (one of the largest in Los Angeles), written accross his neck in huge block letters and a large black spider ("Spider" is his street name) inked onto the side of his head"(l.12). It seems very hard for him to get out of F13 : "But escaping the pull of a gang life is extremely difficult"(l.22). But Gabriel Hinojos looks like a brave man, he can handle any pain to leave his gang behind and start a new life, because when he has to remove his tattoos, "he grimaced in pain"(l.8). He even describes how it feels like so the reader can feel his pain too : "You know when you're cooking and the oil hits you? It feels like that, over and over."(l.9).

2. 'Ya'Stuvo' is a tatto removal center, who aims to help gang bangers to remove their tattoos so they can get out of their gang. This spanish name means "that's enough, I'm done with that" (l.2). The name of the center has a symbolical meaning, because if the gang members go to that center is only to erase their tattoos as they erase they life as a gang banger.

3. According to the text, the "black teardrops" stand for "a stint in prison or a person killed" (l.5). This tattoo  simbolizes the number of people that the gang banger killed or it can represent a period of time in prison. These tattoed teardrops can maybe have a meaning : a gang banger doesn't suffer and doesn't cry even if he goes through terrible events. This tattoo could be a way to prove their strenght and courage.

4. This short sentence prove us that Gabriel Hinojos really wants to get rid of his tattoos to quit his gang once and for all. We can see in the article that Hinojos is going through a lot of pain to erase his tattoos but in spite of this, it's still his 45th to "Ya' stuvo". This shows his determination and his bravery.

5. Getting out of a gang is not easy : "Getting out of a street gang in L.A. is about like getting a tattoo removed ; slow, painful, scarring" (l.17).  Even if Hinojos tries really hard to leave his gang, the latter will always leave scars on his body and in his mind. But it should be noticed that Hinojos has been rewarded for his efforts : "He celebrated his achievement by sipping white wine with former first lady Laura Bush at the White House"(l.26)

6. It is not always possible because the article shows us how deep the scars left can be : "In street lore, a gang banger can never leave a really brutal gang"(l.18). "But escaping the pull of a gang life is extremely difficult"(l.22). Hinojos is making loads of efforts to move on but it is clear that F13 will always leave marks on him : "Some tattoos have faded into a faint collection of light gray lines, but they haven't gone away entirely". (l.14). Moreover, even if Hinojos was considered as the "poster child for leaving his gang life behind"(l.25), the end of the article says that "a few months later, he was back in jail"(l.27).

7. It can be feasible if the gang member has achieved a few conditions : first, he has to go through a stint in prison and then he has to show that he can seel drugs and use a gun.

8. It is very difficult to leave a gang accroding to Hinojos, because he misses the adrenaline that he felt and he's going through a lot of pain now to get all of his tattoos removed. Hinojos felt really good feelings when he was a gang member and now he's mostly feeling pain. Even if he knows that it's for the best, he misses the "old times".

9. The last three lines explains us that Hinojos was the perfect example of leaving the gang behind, so he met the former first lady Laura Bush at the White House. But in spite of this, Hinojos went back to jail. The temptation of feeling the adrenaline again was to strong that even after all his efforts, the attraction for the gang was to strong.

10. The photograph is showing us Hinojos who's getting his tatto removed. The laser looks really painful because of Hinojos'face. He's going through pain but he's handling it. Just like the article, the photograph shows the bravery of Gabriel and how the pain is not an obstacle for him. that he's going to leave his gang behind.

POST 4 : Pop Art myths and the "Myths and Heroes" notion

  

The myth of woman through painting

                                Roy Lichtenstein, Woman in in bath, 1963, exhibited at the
                                Thyssen-Bornemisza museum in Madrid


      It is generally believed that a myth is a popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or ocurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal. Thus, we can consider that women have become a myth through paintings, because they were, and they still are, a source of inspiration for many artists. Thereby, women could be seen as heroes for artists, a hero being the protagonist of a novel or a poem and, in this particular case, a work of art. Pop Art aims to integrate erotic metaphores into paintings. This movement emerged in the late 1950s and early 1960s. On the one hand,it was a groundbreaking movement derived from television advertising or comics. On the other hand it was clearly oriented towards the past in its eagerness to connect with tradition, many artists are reinterpreting . According to this, they've chosen to represent women just like ancient artistic movements did. Woman is turned into an object of desire. 

     Woman in bath was realised by Roy Lichtenstein in 1963. The artist used primary colours (blue, red and yellow) to represent a daily scene in a comic-strip style. The feminity of the woman is emphasized thanks to her red and pulpy lips, her blue eyes and her curly hair. Contrary to older paintings like The bath of Venus by Boucher, her nudity is only suggested, which increases her sensuality. This work of art could illustrate the Myths and Heroes notion because it shows how woman is a myth in a painting context, being that artists use them as the core of their paintings. We can associate this lady to the figure of Venus, the incarnation of the ideal woman. Indeed, Venus was often represented with water around her, which can be considered as a metaphore of woman because of its fluidity and purity, hence the choice of Lichtenstein to represent a woman in a bathtub. However, Lichtenstein wanted to bring novelty to this myth by not giving any name to this particular woman so that every woman could identify herself with this incarnation of beauty. Thereby, the artist's goal may be to criticize the banality of appearances, being that the myth of beauty has to be necessarily embodied by a pulpy woman, with long hair and  be half naked. Everybody has the same vision of the perfect woman, whereas every single woman has her own beauty. 

    Pop Art has been an important movement because of its ideas : it wanted to break with the past but also to reflect on art and on reality, on art and tradition, and on art and museums. A source of inspiration for Pop artists were the myths provided by Hollywood studios, also known as the "myth-making machine". They've chosen to reinterpret these myths in their own way, just as Lichtenstein does with the myth of woman. I personnally believe that Pop Art made art evolve, but above all, it helped us  change our point of view on very famous myths. Pop Art contribued to "modern mythology", bringing novelty to very-known myths by using different forms and painting techniques like collages, comic-strips or stencils.