Tonight I attended a showing of Bandslam. This is a teen, high school story about growing up and taking negative and making it positive. The movie was fine, but my 13 year old daughter was sitting beside me smiling, giggling and enjoying. The experience in the moment was beautiful, a father and daughter enjoying a movie together.
The social, psychological and economic issues raised by the content were overshadowed by the moment in time. Quality time spent with my daughter, without communicating directly during the movie with each other but, experiencing the enjoyment of a media production. The product placements were obvious and were even alluded to in the dialogue of the movie. The main character once commented on the commercialization of bands and band names so that the original artistry gets lost in the commercialism.
It is interesting that the dialogue brings our attention to the over commercialization of art. Of course the lesson is ironic in its very existence in a Hollywood movie. But I wonder if it is better to have this reference in the movie or not? Is the lesson learned and/or communicated to the viewers that too much commercialism is not good? Maybe.
As educators we aspire to educate. Some (academic) bloggers argue continuously that education is not for employment but for the development of the self or the intellect. Why can't the two be interconnected?
Bandslam is probably a mediocre movie overall but it is a very professional production. Is there really anything wrong with helping students be capable of working on a professional Hollywood movie like Bandslam or on TV news or radio etc? We, my daughter and I, just did two days in Universal Studios in Hollywood. The professional attitude and development of the Universal Studios theme park is of a very very high standard.
Interestingly, I spent a lot of my time there critiquing the commercial aspects of the park but was asked to complete a survey as I left. I did. I could not fault the place for entertainment and courtesy of staff. Maybe it is a little pricy but I just thought that it was a great experience with my 13 year old daughter (if commercialism is ignored).
Is there really anything wrong with the commercial characters and the themes? Is there a better model? What is it? Let's be realistic with our answers. Is a Marxist (society) theme park really feasible? If so, how?
As I ready for my one way trip to Ireland on an Aer lingus flight I have heard from a responsible source that Aer Lingus is stopping direct flights from San Francisco to Dublin because of Irish Trade Unions demands. I am informed that the requirements made for Aer Lingus crews on long haul flights are over and above the requirements made and granted to other air transport companies.
I'm all for the employee. I'm all for less commercialism, even a little sharing and caring. But when demands for changes are made in any situation we must be careful to consider carefully the alternatives. I will benefit (it seems) from the direct flight from San Francisco to Dublin but I will be one of the last. Perhaps a little compromise could have saved the route? I don't know.
Proposing media theories which inevitably tear down the structure of the media without an appreciation of how it actually works is a one sided pedagogical approach. A little compromise/balance might give the student an appreciation for the theories of Marxism, sociology and psychology WITHIN the structure that is reality. Knocking it all down all the time will only turn them against one side or the other. We can engage the theories of criticism while at the same time appreciating the profession which the students are expected to operate within, hopefully happily.
What I do know is this. A Hollywood movie on a Friday evening in San Francisco was enjoyed thoroughly by a 40 year old man and his 13 year old daughter. It gave them material for discussion and chat. They smiled and giggled at happenings on the screen which identified that they had something in common. Laughter.
I'll take this experience without questions. Hollywood or Marx - at the end of it all, it is about human communication.
The Inflation of Followers
1 year ago
1 comment:
I don't think anybody (even Marxists) would argue that education doesn't play a role in employment and the economy, just that that is not all education should do. In the UK the democratic, social and intellectual aspects of education are being eroded as it is made increasing subservient to business and the economy. Historically education has always been important in the allocation of jobs and that would be case even in a socialist society - after all people will need to be reskilled to work in the Marxist theme parks:)
There is nothing wrong with helping people find work within the present political economic arrangements - we've all got to eat - but education should also make people curious, critical, investigative and challenging.
History shows that moments of social change, poltical reform or revolution more often than not have at their core educative process. That's why education is is so importance beyond economic imperatives.
For instance the Chartists in England who campaigned for the extension of the vote in the 19th cnetury did so under the banner 'knowledge is power'. But knowledge can also enslave. What if your told that the only knowledge worth anything is that which will make you an obedient subject of the economic order? There are people who have endure poverty and hardship before they would know themselves as slaves.
And poverty takes many shapes. We can be materially well off but intellectually poor. I'm reminded of the chapter in Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol when the Ghost of Christmans Present stands before Scrooge and throws back his coat to reveal to starving children named Want and Ingnorance. And he warns Scrooge to be particularly wary of Ignorance...
Post a Comment