POST 14: Elephant, a Gus Van Sant movie (2003)

1) What struck you most in the film?
  In this film what strucked me the most is the posture of the students who seem a little bit caricatured and seem to be in other world when the killers began to shoot.
For example in the scene when the shooting begin there are people who think it´s a joke when people is screaming. Another example it´s just the killers are going to the library with their guns and the girl is not scared at all.

2) What also impressed you?
  In my point of view what impressed me the most was in the way to record the movie. Actually Gus Van Sant finds the way to show us a normal day in a school. We follow all the characters in the corridors, we see their personalities, the director wants to involve us in the movie. Thanks to the cameras which follow the characters all around the school we take part in the story from the very beginning.

3) Did you find anything more particularly upsetting?
  Logically the story is very upsetting. The fact to have two classmates who arrive one day equipped with a submachine gun with the purpose to kill me and the rest of the school is terrible. The most upsetting is that the school students ask them before dying the reason to do that.

4) What did you find very disturbing?
To be honnest, all along the film there is a part in the movie that I didn´t understand. This part is the scene where the black student called Benny who is walking towards the shooters as if nothing was happening around  him. When he sees one of the killers about to fire a teacher and he doesn´t do anything, he just walks until the shooter looks at him and kills him. That was very disturbing because the viewer doesn´t understand why he did that instead of having run away or having stopped the shooter.

5) What was most shocking?
For me the most shocking in the film is the final scene. After the death of his friend, Alex, one of the killers seems to be normal and when it seems the story is arriving at its end he finds Jordan and his girlfriend. When Jordan asks him why he does that Alex starts to sing a song while he points the two teenagers.
 Other thing that shocked me is the fact that the actors have the same name that their charaters. That is very shocking, as if the actors and the characters were the same person. In my opinion Gus Van Sant chooses this resource because he doesn´t want to recreate seamlessly what happened this day. He prefers to create this shooting with his imagination and we live a real shooting thanks to the realism of the characters and the way to record it. 
 

 6) What does the film  suggest about the two school shooters?
   The film suggests the two school shooters are bullied by their classmates. We can appreciate they are alone, for example Alex has just Eric as a friend and he visits him sometimes in his house when his parents are away.
Furthermore we can see the two characters are psycopaths who think this shooting is a funny game, they do that just to have a good time. More the film advances more we can see they are crazy, for example, just before the shooting they are watching videos on Nazi propaganda or they are kissing in the shower.
  

7) What's more, what does the film director make clear about the two killers?
  The director wants to show this people is rejected by the society, there are bullied and alone. The director wants also to show that everybody have access to the guns. The two characters are two lonely teenagers with a growing hatred against the society.

8) What kind of approach to the school shooting itself did Gus Van Sant opt for?
  Gus Van Sant opted to use flashbacks all along the film with the finality to understand why it happened before and after the shooting. As we have seen before we can see that Gus Van Sant chooses to follow the characters all around the school to make us to come into the story, Gus Van Sant doesn´t want to have viewers, he wants to have witnesses.

9) Moreover, what's the main consequence of the realistic treatment he uses? What about the 'poetic' touches he instills throughout the film?
 The whole film is very realistic in all its elements, the time, the sound and the lights envolved the viewer. We can also appreciate that the director uses poetic touches like the character of John. Actually this character is blond and has long hair. He reminds us the image of an angel. Since the beginning of the story we can interpret other symbols that make us think about what can happen later in the film.

  10) As a conclusion, what must we admit about the way in which the killing and the killers are perceived by the film viewers?
  As a conclusion we can admit that this film goes far beyond a simple movie which tells us a story.
 The viewer gets a place into the film, around the film. The director chooses to put a lot of types of characters who are very different among them. The viewer can think 'who is better' to die.
 For example Gus shows us a group of girls who seem a little bit stupid and in another hand he puts  a nice guy who takes photos to the people.
 The viewer can be happier or more sad depending on who is touched. Gus achieves that because the viewer is on the side of shooters unconsciously.
 Even if he shows us two monsters he tells us we can be monsters too.
 The film ends with the message that we may be any of the characters, the shooters or the angel.

POST 13: THE US GUN CULTURE

Steve SACK, on www.startribune.com,

Gun Lobby and Congress (2010)

Dave GRANDLUN

Second Amendment and NRA (2013)

D, on www.davegranlund.com, 

The Founding Fathers of the United States are the individuals of the Thirteen British Colonies in North America who led the American Revolution against the authority of the British Crown and established the United States of America.

The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American nonprofit organization which advocates for gun rights.^[3][5][6] Founded in 1871, the group has informed its members about firearm-related bills since 1934, and it has directly lobbied for and against legislation since 1975.^[7] It is also the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the United States.

This first document is a caricature of the journal startribune drawn by Steve Sack. In this cartoon we can notice two men who represent the Gun lobby and the Congress. In the middle of them, the Gun lobby representative is bribing with a bag filled with dollars.

 On the other side, in the background, a river of blood flows from the top stairs from the Capitol down to the scene where stand the two characters. We can read on the bullet what the Gun lobby representative says: "Now where were we, before we were so rudely interrupted..."

The overall scene may be be a critic of the power's gun in America. Another way to look at the question is the presence of money that shows the laws are based on corruption and they are not meant to improve Americans' better life. The bullet shows the power of big lobbys that bribe the government with the objective of  making more money. The fact of having a river of blood represents the opposition of people to keep arms. That is, the presence of violence makes it necessary to have guns in society. 

The second document is a picture by Dave Grandlun in 2013.

In this image two statues represent two soldiers of a different century. The soldier on the left side of the bullet represent the Second Amendment as defined by the founding fathers. The soldier stands on a column of stone and he is equipped with a rifle as its only protection.

Contrary to the character on the left, the character on the right side stands on an ammunition box.

The soldier is equipped with three machine guns all around his body, and two guns along the legs. Actually it is written he is the Second Amendment  defined by the NRA.

This cartoon show a vision very different by the notion of the Second Amendment. It is well-known the fact that the Civil War soldier represents the heroic acts of Americans who had the courage to fight in the Civil War for the freedom of the United States of America. The soldier has just one rifle in front of a lot of soldiers. The other soldier is equipped with a lot of guns that make very easy to kill his enemies. 

That is a critic of the power of guns in USA that create more violence and hatred towards other countries. In conclusion, it should be emphasized that this cartoon shows that the vision of war in USA is changing in the history. We must admit that a lot of problems in the war were caused by the military conflicts since the Cold War. Actually we can focuse on the representation of the two characters who are representated very differently. The first one fights for the freedom of a country and the other one likes the excessive uncontrolled weapons for wars that imply much more problems 

. 

POST 7; THE IDEA OF PROGRESS: QUANTITY vs. QUALITY

Today we will study the difference between quantity and quality. To illustrate it I've chosen the example of the vehicles. To explain it we will use two documents, one focused on quantity and the other one focused on quality.

Quantity

Quality

Since the XXth century the production of cars doesn´t stop growing.
 Thanks to the current economy people buy one or more cars. As we can see in the first document the worldwide automobile production from 2000 to 2015 (in millions) was doubled in 15 years.

 That gives to the majority of citizens the possibility of being transported faster and in a more comfortable way.

 We can observe that the population is growing at the same time as car´s production, so we can say cars are becoming a very important instrument in our society.

 If we talk about quality, we can see we have vehicles with better performances that enable to drive in a more comfortable and secure way. 

 Unfortunately this big quantity of vehicles provokes a lot of pollution. The CO2 emissions from cars increase the problems of climatic change. As we have seen our society produces a lot of cars which help the citizens but we have to point out that just one car contaminates too much so we can imagine how high has to be the contamination provoked by millions and millions of cars driven all around the World. In addition the sound in the cities also is growing. That is more problematic than people may think. Several scientists and experts dealing with the matter, and numerous official bodies have unanimously declared that noise has very harmful effects on health. Its affections are not only due to its direct effect: discomfort, communication and attention problems or sleep disorders, but also those related to prolonged exposures: chronic fatigue, insomnia, cardiovascular diseases, immune system disorders, anxiety, depression, Irritability, nausea, migraines and behavioral changes - hygiene, intolerance,aggression, social isolation.


On the other hand, it is to underline that cars take a lot of space in the street, if we observe how many people occupy just one car the average is 1,2 person for car.
Fortunately there exist electronic cars which permit to retain pollution levels and to avoid sound contamination but they don't offer a solution to the space problem. There are also other transport alternatives like the bycicle.
To conclude we can say the quantity of cars is increasing in parallel with the World population. Concerning the quality we have seen that technological progress is increasing constantly. But unfortunely that provokes a lot of problems which is necesssary to change. Thanks to these two documents we can observe the importance to find a balance between quantity and quality to solve all the problems exposed.

Post 4:MYTHS AND HEROES

  300 is a 2006 American fantasy war film based upon the 1998 comic book series of the same name  created by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley.  300 is a fictional story of the Battle of Thermopylae during the second Persian invasion of Greece.  The film is a Warner Bross Production and was directed by Zack Snydery while Miller served as executive producer and consultant. Music was composed by Tyler Bates and was released on March 6, 2007, three days before the film opened for public viewing.

The characteristic of the film is it was filmed mostly with a super imposition chroma key technique to help replicate the imagery of the original comic book.

The story related the life of the King Leonidas of Sparta (Gerald Butler) who leads 300 Spartans into battle against the Persian ‘good-king’ Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro) and his invading army of more than 300,000 soldiers. As the battle rages, Queen Gorgus (Lena Headay) attempts to rally support  from Sparta for her husband.

In the whole film the story is framed by a voiceover narrative by the Spartan soldier Dilios (David Wenham). Through this narrative technique various fantastical creatures are introduced, placing 300 within the genre of this classical fantasy.

Let’s  examine now the relation between the notion Myths and Heroes.

First of all, we can say the battle of the Thermopylae is a Myth because it corresponds to the first definition of a Myth: 

-‘A traditional, typically ancient story revolving around the activities of gods and heroes which purpose is to explain a natural phenomenon or cultural practice and serves as a fundamental type in the world view a point’.

In fact, this story is not just a fictional film but it is also based on historical facts, when the Spartans stopped the advance of the Persians.  That was a real Persian historical milestone where the Spartans were in a big inferiority.

In another hand the figure of King Leonidas is a perfect example of what a hero model  is, as he has the skills of  two of the three definitions:

-A mythological or legendary figure, often of divine descent, endowed with great strength or ability, celebrated for his bold exploits, and favored by the gods.

Actually he is very courageous and strong, he is not at all fearful, and he challenged Xerxes. If we focuse on his battles he shows to be very strong and even the most feared warriors  are afraid of him. If we observe the dialogues between Xerxes and Leonidas, we can appreciate that Xerxes has more respect towards Leonidas, as it should be the contrary.

-A character with noble qualities who, in the face of danger and adversity or from a position of weakness, displays courage and the will for self sacrifice-that is, heroism-for some greater good of all humanity.

As we have seen, Leonidas is  very courageous,  strong and he has no fear, and this three qualities are noble. Thanks to this courage he stops the advance of the Persians and he becomes a real hero. Leonidas  sacrifices himself for others and even if he knows he will die he comes in the lion´s den. But he wins time for other Greece´s cities to prepare their battles.  Thanks to him Persians lost the battle to conquer Greece.

We can conclude that 300 is the perfect example to explain the notion ‘Myth and Heroes’ as it encompasses all the aspects of the notion. 

POST 6: An Art Exhibition Review

1) Today we will discover the exhibition called "Pop Art Myths", a complete contemporary artworks exhibited at the prestigious Thyssen Museum, from June 10th to July 14th, 2014.
This museum is located in Madrid,  Paseo del Prado 8.

Museum Thyssen

2) Visiting the exhibition we could contemplate a lot of Pop Art´s artworks. Paintings from the most famous and iconic artists (like Andy Warhol) were present, masterpieces like 'woman in Bath' of Roy Lichtenstein not to be missed

The exhibition is divided into six thematic parts: emblems, myths, portraits, landscapes, interoirs and still lifes,urbano eroticism and finally the history. 

Woman in Bath Roy Lichenstein

We may conclude that this exibithion gives us a new way to enjoy the history of the Pop Art in the whole world.

Andy Worhol

3) This is an exhibition filled of colors and light, with great variations among the artists. Below we can see a revolutionary painting, very representative of Pop Art.

To begin with, we will talk about  The Living Room, an art piece painted by Equipo Crónica. When contemplating it we remember the painting of Velazquez Las Meninas. That makes us very curious and push us to look for the differences with the original painting. We can appreciate more lively colors than in the original one and a lot of things are changed.

Las Meninas of Velazquez

For me this painting represents very good the Pop Art because it corresponds to the definition  "Pop art presented a challenge to traditions of fine art by including imagery from popular culture such as advertising and news."

Additionally, we have to note that contrary to the original piece the atmosphere of the two artworks are very different. We can make a distinction between the objects of the two pieces and the positions of the characters. Likewise the little girls are with the same expressions, in the left we have the painter (Velazquez) and behind in the right two men, just the two characters in the background have disappeared.  In another hand we can see a lot of modern objects are introduced (couch, plastic ball, paintings of clowns...).

It´s undeniable that this new painting changes completely the vision of the classic art and in my opinion it can just be truly appreciated by  people with an open mind who are ready to see he big change in art that reflects our society.  

We can draw a  comparison between the two artworks. In fact it narrates the same  situation with different points of view: the classic view and the the modern one.

Additionally, we have to take into account that individual points of view are very personal. In my opinion I think these artworks are very similar to the notion Myth and Heroes in the sense of the last definition of a myth:

 -A popular belief or story that has become associated with a person, institution, or occurrence, especially one considered to illustrate a cultural ideal.        

If we focuse on the painting colors, it reminds us the 50s´in the USA, when it appeared all the glamour and gave a lot of cultural power to this country in the world. A vision totally opposed to the century of the classic painting when sepia and dark colors were used and subjects represented gave a very different image of the world.  

Definitely, we can affirm the Art Pop gave a rupturist vision of the world thanks to the vibrant colors and to the prosperity of the nation it reflected.

4) To start with, let us try to understand I´m just a TL student. In my life I´ve always liked art, I´m proud to say I visited a lot of museums like the Prado or the Louvre. That gave me a good background to make my own points of view when I contemplate artworks. I have to confess that opinions expressed in this post are influenced by my personal experience.

Andy Warhol Brillo Soap Pads, 1964

This artwork called Brillo Soap Pads  is one of the most famous from Andy Warhol. It was finished in 1964.  It belongs to the movement Pop Art ("Pop art presented a challenge to traditions of fine art by including imagery from popular culture such as advertising and news"). It represents a white box with the word "Brillo" and text describing the characteristics of the soap; it is supposed to be just a Soap box. Most of the time, people don't understand the real message of the artwork.

In my view, it goes without saying that I do not agree with that because the artwork transmit clearly a message related the consumerism. We call that box "artwork" if we see it in a museum, but we don't appreciate it if we are in a shop. Andy Warhol shows the magnitude consumerism in the new society, where lots of Brillo boxes are manufactured and bought by thousands people everyday.

In the first place, we may wonder of the social importance the work tries to transmit. In my opinion is a mirror of the 60´in USA. Thanks to the Pop Art the artists asked themselves about the real art essence. The idea of the consumerism is present in other Warhol's works. 

Coca-Cola

Campbell's Soup Cans 

                                                                                                                                               

Andy Warhol shows us another concept of art. If we leave aside the idea of the consumerism and we enjoy the aesthetic of the colours we can take a real pleasure in admiring the artworks. If there is something I specially appreciate in this Pop Art works is their colours because they transport us to another world and they bring us into a big reflexion. Nobody see the same thing and the viewer ask himself  "why is like this?".

Personally Pop Art makes me dream and lead me to another epoque and to think about the history, and I think this is the best present an artwork can give us.

Others Artworks

Look Mickey, Roy Lichtenstein, 1961

Thank you, Richard Lindner, 1971

Still life # 34, Tom Wesselmann, 1963

Cleopatra, Mimmo Rotella, 1963

POST 2: Chris/Alexander & and the myth of the noble/good savage in Sean Penns´s Into the Wild movie

                               

Alexander/Chris in the movie Into the Wild                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  The noble savage

2) Defintion of "The noble savage"

The idea of the noble/good savage was created in the 17th century and developed during the 18th century.The term "noble savage" is an idea people had: Without civilization, humans are essentially good; it is civilization that makes them act in bad ways. The idea started in the 17th century and developed in the 18th century. One of the first to express it was Shaftesbury. He told the would-be author “to search for that simplicity of manners, and innocence of behaviour, which has been often known among mere savages; ere they were corrupted by our commerce”. His counter to the doctrine of original sin, born amid the optimistic atmosphere of Renaissance humanism, was taken up by another author who lived at the same time, the essayist Richard Steele, who attributed the corruption of contemporary manners to false education.

In the eighteenth-century cult of "Primitivism" the noble savage, uncorrupted by the influences of civilization, was considered more worthy, more authentically noble than the contemporary product of civilized training. Although the phrase noble savage first appeared in Dryden's The Conquest of Granada (1672), the idealized picture of "nature's gentleman" was an aspect of eighteenth-century sentimentalism, among other forces at work.

3) a. Chris believes the wildness is the place of the freedom and there are only natural beauty which never touched by humans . For him our society makes us very materialistics and superficials, this world would be false. This is illustrated in the film thanks to the scene when he is in a restaurant with his family and he tells him the words things, things and things...".An other example is when he arrives in Los Angeles. During his traveling he is poor and he looks with the eyes of a trampman people in suits with refreshments in bars and it reminds him of himself when he was like them. In this moment he thinks the people is dominated by the money and makes us egoist and hypocrits. . For Chris the wild is a place where the greed doesn´t arrive, he looks her like an utopia. So he embody the myth of the noble savage in the way that he doesn't want to be influenced by society and civilisation.But we can say he isn´t one because Chris know the society and he noble savage must never touhed the society . Although he has similar ideas like the noble savage.

b. When Chris decides to go live in the wild he wants to life free of the society, discover the essence of the real life. Chris wants to find this freedom whih the society can´t give him and he tried to life with he is himself who take the decisions and to worry of the real importants things of the live, his life. For an other side he searchs a spiritual way of him and where he can understand who really is without the opinions of others. For concluded in one word he wants to see what is the "hapiness".

c. Logically Chris is unexperienced and he goes into the wild without any preparation. To begin Chris doesn´t know the principals methods of survival, for instance, in the scene where he goes hunting and sees a deer, he decides not to shoot it because he sees it has a baby. An other example is when he doesn´t take provisions when he goes in Alaska.That cotradictory because after he said he wants to live without materials things he finds the Magic bus and uses all the things n the bus. My last example is at the end of the film when he died for eat poison. It´s an example that he doesn´t know the dangers of the nature. For the ending we can say thanks to his ignorance he ends up dead.

d. For my opinion Chris is more of a romantic man than a good savage because the good savage doesn´t know what is the civilisation and i not the case of Chris so we would say is feelings are the feelings of a good savage.He is romantic in the side he looks the nature like an utopia without knowing the reals dangers of this lifestyle. For conluded we can say Chris thinks like this thanks to his experiences and not how a noble savage for is nature.

e. Initially we can think is imposible to life in the nature if we are lived in society because we are habituated at the comforts and easy live (we have homes, electricity, water,..) but it is possible.Because in this society a lot of people see like Chris the untrue where we live and in groups we can reboot of the beginig..For n other side the humans can survive in worriest situations (wars like Syria, holocaust, tortures...) But the solution is unification, a man can not survive alone, because as wolves or dogs we are an animal that should be in the group. If we remove the group as much as possible is that the man who is alone die.So if somebody goes alone the most possible is he dies. But if e wants goes alone urgently he needs some preparation, For me the smartest if somebody wants to go into the wild is an important knowing of the rules of survival and increasingly traveling in the forest for have a good visualization of the environment.

Personaly when I will be most old I will discovered like Chris, this world, but all the time with friends and communicate because I found too this world very superficial and we are destroying all the nature in the world so I want to see them before it will be to late

POST1:THE IDEA OF PROGRESS

THE IDEA OF PROGRESS

As an introduction to the idea of progress as a whole, please check the worksheet on

THE IDEA OF PROGRESS

1. Read the definitions and fill in the gaps with suitable words.

PROGRESS

1. Forward movement, as toward a goal . Advance .  Development . INCREASE =

                                    =======>> ALWAYS MORE

2. Gradual betterment . Steady / Progressive  EVOLUTION of society / civilization / humankind.

                                    =======>> ALWAYS BETTER

2. Brainstorming: Here is a list of questions you must ask yourself about the notion. Complete the blanks.

What type of progress?

technological / scientific / social / ECOLOGICAL / ECONOMICAL /LIBERTY /EDUCATIONAL/DEMOCRATY / LONGEVITY/ (...)

Who are the people concerned?

individuals / companies / governments / scientists/ researchers/ citizens / armies/  (,,,)

Which period of time is concerned?

the past / the present / the future/ nowadays/ tomorrow / (...)

What is at stake?

medical issues / physical performances / technical advances / innovations / dehumanization / domination / environmental issues / animal rights / place of woman in society / race relations / social inequalities / economic opportunities / globalization / humanity / medicine/ sport / future generations(...)

What are the advantages and disadvantages (= drawbacks) / the pros  and cons / the upside and  downside?

The positive thing is the progress could help all of us, but we don’t know if it can be bad  (arms,...)

Is it profitable (= advantageous / positive)  or is it potentially dangerous  (negative / disadvantageous)

for human beings? Why?

We can say the progress plays in two side because in a utopian world the progress can help everybody, but in the other side the people who take before this progress can turn this help in a very dangerous weapon.

Is the impact positive or negative?  For whom?

This impact its very good for the people who have a lot of power and negative to the people who haven’t this.

Can we afford to reject progress  or can’t we do without it (nowadays & in future)?

We never reject anything because all type of progress It’s welcome but we must do a balance of this power.

Can’t we improve on the idea of progress  commonly accepted  in  our  modern world and consumer society? If so, how?

We must follow the progress because it’s the only able to break the freedom in the world.

3. Build up your vocabulary

Complete the grid during the school-year with words and phrases suitable for the notion

UPSIDE / THE PROS	TYPES OF PROGRESS	DOWNSIDE / THE CONS
Enable  people to work  more efficiently  / improve our living standard  / ...	Technological progress	Cut people off from the real world /  lose touch with nature  / ...
Increase the knowledge  of  the world  / discover new materials  / ...	Scientific progress	Raise  ethical issues  /  create new inequalities  /  ...
Upgrade education  /  reduce gender and racial discrimination  / ...	Social progress	Lose traditional values  /  disrupt conservative lifestyles  /  ...
Know more for the neighbor/read and learn about others cultures	Cultural progress	Hate the others/be interesting by the human history