Discussion response for Sturken and Cartwright’s “Postmodernism, Indie Media, and Popular Culture”:

1. Postmodernism asserts that identity is performed, and the physical body is imagined to be easily transformed. Give an example of a public figure incorporating these postmodern ideals into their identity, and the processes by which they do this.

In modernism, the image of the body is viewed as stable and fixed, meaning a person lives with the identity (gender, race, sexuality) they were born with. Opposite to that, postmodernism perceives identity as “fragmented, pluralistic, and multifaceted.” Additionally, postmodern has been used to describe individuals that generate their identities through a myriad of media images and texts and creating simulacra (a hyperreal identity that doesn’t connect back to the real person, but instead their media image seen as more real). As a result, there is the idea that people perform their identities, rather than being fixed with what they were born with.

Putting on and off a performing identity or image has been a characteristic of pop artists since the 1980s with the emergence of music videos and a greater sense of visual performance. Sturken and Cartwright highlight Madonna as one of the first to popularize parodying and adopting styles from others. Her image was based on the Madonna, Marilyn Monroe, and a number of alternative style and image transformations throughout her career. Another popular singer, Michael Jackson transformed his identity as “a way of nostalgic reference to past icons” by undergoing a series of surgeries and treatments to change his physical appearance. Both of these two vocal artists’ built themselves as images, and transformed their looks according to a familiar cultural referent. While Madonna changed her appearance through make-up and different clothing choices, Michael Jackson went further in erasing his physical body of black identity and changed to extremely pallor skin. Changing one’s identity can range from cross-dressing, colored lenses, hair dying, make-up to plastic surgery, prosthetics, and even further with idea of cyborgs, half human half robot.

(Warning: image source leads to an anti-Madonna blog…)

But when focusing on one postmodern artist, Lady Gaga was at the forefront of my mind. In one quote Lady Gaga says, “The statement is that I’m not one icon. I’m every icon. I’m an icon that is made out of all the colors on the palette at every time. I have no restrictions.” Not only does her words seem to explicitly state her postmodern mindset, but her actions follow fellow postmodern artists before her. Like Madonna and Michael Jackson, Lady Gaga has referenced and remixed icons – Madonna even being one of them.

Besides the daring outfits of Lady Gaga, there are other aspects of postmodernism beyond transforming the physical body that she incorporates, truly defining her as a postmodern artist. Beginning with her stage name “Lady Gaga”, she is rarely addressed by her birth name Stefani Germanotta. By keeping her personal and celebrity status separate, the identity of Gaga has become multifaceted. Her pop star media image is simulacra, complete with the extravagant outfits and visuals she is recognized for (source). Furthermore, Lady Gaga continuously expressed the message of being yourself, emphasized with her song “Born This Way” (a song that also has speculation about being similar to Madonna’s Express Yourself song). This message rejects traditional structure and social norms of modernism (source). By incorporating strong postmodern ideals into her image, Lady Gaga’s identity is a memorable one.

The following questions are for Vale, “Capital and Capitol: An Introduction,” excerpted from Architecture, Power, and National Identity:

1. Typically historical buildings and monuments are the items most looked at when studying the ideas of power and representation. Are we still implementing these rhetorical architectural designs in the buildings of power in the present?
2. Does the United States seem progressive or regressive when comparing our capital city to those of countries such as Germany, England, and Italy?
3. Have famous buildings of power in the past tried to convey their idea of power with the use of architectural designs of beauty or intimidation?
4. How has history and large-scale urban design intervention affected the symbolism of modern capital cities? Is there a difference between evolved capitals and designed capital cities?
5. What is the difference between capitol and capital, and how do they interact with each other in the capitol complex?

Discussion Question Response to Screens: Television’s Dispersed ‘Broadcast’

1. Could one argue that with the emergence of digitalized media, the face of television, as we know it, is subject to change into an entity (thing with distinct creation) entirely different than what people are familiar with? In what possible ways could this potential change impact society?

Image Credit: fastcodesign

I believe we live in a culture where everything seems to be going faster and faster, and the evolution of television is no exception. With the emergence of digitalized media, television consumption has become, not only faster, but also more individualized and customized. This is the opposite of where television first began. The way television is evolving reminds me of how handwritten letters have grown into email and text messages – another example of the technology boom and its impact. While the format is the same (one person sends a message, the recipient replies), the ways we receive those messages are completely different today. The perception and opinion of handwritten letters have changed – the act now holds a more sentimental value rather than for just purely communication. I think the same is happening to television; a family sitting together to watch one television screen with very limited channel options has now gained an affectionate, almost nostalgic, feel. In “Screens: Television’s Dispersed Broadcast,’” Marshall explains how television utilized a paternalistic form of delivery in that “content was pushed at the viewer, and the viewer accepted the pleasures of the flow.” The pleasures of the flow became summarized as “watching television” where mentioning the specific program was not necessary. I see this same feeling similar with Netflix today; “watching Netflix” has a similar meaning of enjoying the experience without having to specify whatever program explicitly.

While we still feel that pleasure of flow and television is still just a moving image, the way we receive that image has rapidly changed. As television grows in choices, so does the individualization and customization. With cable or satellite, many channels are included with the package that people may or may not watch (either way, you’re paying for them). Looking at DVDs from today, they almost seem like they were more of a trend – they almost feel obsolete now, in my opinion, yet changed television in large ways. It’s important to note that DVDs brought a new layer to television consumption – portability.

With home DVD players, subsequent production moved to making the players portable – now with laptops, iPads, tablets, and even cell phones, television can reside on a smaller screen. A combination of portability and streaming (and a good Wi-Fi connection) gives the audience complete control over choosing what to watch whenever and wherever.

Another detail to note is that DVD changed a key characteristic of television. Television has a distinct episodic format that has the audience waiting for the next development of the plotline during the episode itself and between each episode. Of course, those breaks during the television episodes show allowed for dispersed advertising. Now with streaming and pre-recording, there’s no longer fixed eyes on the television screen to see those advertisements. Instead, those eyes fast forward through the commercials or skip them altogether (although, the streaming site Hulu does include interspersed advertising). The ability of streaming and downloading multiple episodes of a television series has not only broken away from dispersed advertising, but has define a culture of “binge-watching” where the audience watches the television episodes for long amounts of time with no break in-between each episode.

Overall, television is the same moving image, but with an increasingly individualized and customized way of getting that image. The ability to stream television contributes to the fast-pace of society and makes television much more portable and accessible for the individual consumption. As of right now, I don’t believe digitalized media and streaming has progressed television into a completely different entity, but once live events (such as news or sporting events) can be streamed seamlessly and directly, I think that’s when the way of traditional television may end and a new era could be ushered in.

In the 1990’s, the Internet was this new and crazy idea. The media and television stations were able to yield more power over the public image of Hillary Clinton. Today, the Internet plays a vital role to daily life, and with the evolution of social media, celebrities, politicians, and other public figures are able to control their image more. Although the media still has the ability to manipulate any visuals from public figures, having social media takes away the middleman (the media) in a way. If someone follows Hillary Clinton’s account directly on Twitter, then watching the news might not be a top priority.

It is important to note that Hillary Clinton is a special case since she is running for presidency. Even with social media, television and news station possess a large role in how she is portrayed since the presidency campaign is a high coverage topic. Nevertheless, I believe the news stations hold more influence over the older generations, whereas Internet-based media has a stronger presence in the younger millennial generation. For example, there are viral posts comparing Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders, her main competitor for the Democratic nomination, and highlight how “old” or “out-of-date” Clinton is with younger voters. Official media organizations are not responsible for those posts, but instead it is the young adults who are social media users.

Either way, wherever or however people rely on obtaining information, repetition is a crucial factor when enforcing ideas or statements, whether good or bad. There’s a saying that if you tell yourself something enough times, then you will eventually start to believe it. If the media portrays a message enough times, people will start to believe it – similar to war propaganda. A present day example would be Jimmy Kimmel’s Lie Witness News, which showcases how people are willing to lie to sound like they are knowledgeable about the topic. While visual manipulation is probably present, the message continues to be the same and doxa is created, people continue to believe and comment on how ignorant those people featured in the video are. That can be hard when the public relies on news stations to be honest and factual, when in reality they are biased or altering the news.

As stated in the HRC article, images from the 1992 campaign are recycled for stories and therefore, can be re-contextualized for whatever story the media intends to portray. The video shown during class, “Hillary Clinton for Millennials”, used several images and videos from that time period. While the video was published to YouTube in 2015, it displayed visuals from decades ago. News recycling is not something new and will not be eradicated in the near future. From the HRC article, there are multiple motives for the use of news recycling: appearance of consistent and factual stories, saving money, and impression that the news stations was there capturing the important events. Although these are conceivable motives, at what point is news recycling not suitable? There are certainly more current videos and images of Clinton, yet decade old images and the squiggly, colorful aesthetic of the 1990’s were prominent in the “Hillary Clinton for Millennials” video. This exemplifies how the media is trying to create a common belief about Clinton using news recycling. As Hillary Clinton continues to run for presidency and be in the spotlight, her control over her image deceases more and more everyday. Clinton’s social media posts can only sway the public so much, and even then, those posts can be manipulated and reframed by the media.