X-Men and how I learned about Inequality

      I first came to know about the X-men through the excellent early 90's television series. It, like Batman the Animated Series, gave me a sense of wonder, adventure and excitement when I was a child. However, with X-men I got my first glimpse into a topic that would end up being the focus of my academic study when I was a student, as well as the field of research specialization in my career: Social Inequality.  It was through the X-men that I took my first steps into a larger world; understanding mature concepts like privilege, discrimination, segregation, genocide, normalization through colorful characters that would fight each other.   

        The X-men are no strangers to social commentary.  Since their inception, "The X-men" and other related characters have been used as an allegory for holocaust survivors, people of color, LGBTQAI, Persons with disabilities (PWDs) or any other social outcast or alienated group (e.g. angst ridden teenagers that made up most of the comics readership).  Although the X-men were originally created as an easy way to explain their superpower origins (ala "They're a mutant"),  the growing multiculturalism and diversity of the X-men roster (across it's multiple monthly comic book titles) means that a reader can find at least one X-men character that looks like them/and or they can identify with; which is difficult in our media saturated world where most of our heroes depicted or portrayed by straight, white, able-bodied men. Credit for this vibrantly diverse world of "real" characters needs to be given to Chris Claremont.

      Stan Lee may have created the X-men, but it was Chris Claremont that gave them life. In Chris Claremont's tenure as the chief writer of many X-men and X-men related titles; over the years he expanded the X-men universe exponentially.  He gave us the origin of Magneto (pairing him off with Xavier as loosely representing the ideological differences of Malcolm X and MLK), the Phoenix and the Dark Pheonix sagas, Days of Future Past, Nightcrawler, Storm, Rouge, Mystique, Wolverine and the highly underrated and overlooked Kitty Pryde.  Claremont not only introduced these great stories and characters, but he is responsible for making the X-men socially relevant and socially conscious. From the idea of the mutant registration act, (forcing Mutants to have to register with the government), genocide through the Sentinal program,  the notion of a cure for the mutant X-gene, and the Morlocks.  Claremont echoed the struggles of Jews,  people of color, LGBTQAI, and PWDs. (It is these socially relevant ideas that has lead to great casting opportunities in the X-men film Franchise.)  Claremont made sure that the outcasts of the Marvel Universe, in reality, represented all people in maligned and marginalized groups; myself included.

      As I have mentioned previously on this blog I was born with a mild form of Cerebral Palsy.  To that end, I knew that I was different and that the world I lived in wasn't constructed for me, it was constructed for others; people who were "normal". It was because of this know difference and feelings of being an outcast that, I gravitated to the X-men when I was a pre-teen and teenage boy.  I hoped, against my rational judgment, that because I was physically different it was possible that I could also be a mutant. Because, if I have a physical disability/deformity, life would seek to balance that out by giving me a really cool mutant power. It did not happen ( at least not that I know of ).  Instead, I found a kinship with these characters that has only grown as I've gotten older.  I now believe that the popularity of the X-men, unlike other superhero teams like the Avengers or the Justice League, comes from its diversity and its ability to be relatable to all people. 

       The relatable tradition that was started with Claremont continues in the works of Brian Michael Bendis (who is also doing Guardians of the Galaxy for Marvel: Now) and Brian Wood.  Together their respective "All New X-men and "X-men" runs embrace socially conscious diversity that tackles social inequality as an intersectional problem across age, race, ethnicity, gender, disability, social class and sexuality. 

        Out of the two, I would personally recommend Brian Wood's X-men. This is the first X-men team made up of an all female roster lead by Storm and Rachel Summers( see Image below)  being the headmasters of the Jean Grey School of Higher Learning (created after the events of Schism). There is even an on the nose joke about calling themselves X-men (because they don't like the terms "X-(wo)men" "X-ladies") and they have as yet to think of something better. Also, Storm has her 80's Mohawk back which is awesome!!!!

 



Sociology Alert! Fred Phelps is DEAD, and why it matters!



Fred Phelps is dead. 

I find a lot of hope in this news, because it is proof that ignorance can die. 

        I have spent the last decade or so studying, writing and teaching about social inequality. This process comes with is its own set of challenges.  Chief among them is the constant struggle against public opinion, a opinion that hasn't embraced The Sociological Imagination, which is to say that the public has a difficult time seeing past their own personal (micro level) point of view.  Do not mistake this social phenomena as a bunch of individuals being conceded, narcissistic, or egocentric. Instead, it is the (in)ability to only seeing the world from within your own collection of experiences and interactions; what Mills calls your "private orbits". Living in your "private orbits" limits your ability to see how everything in social life is interconnected.  In the lexicon of my work, this is known as "intersectionality".  This ignorance of a macro perspective leads to a shallow understanding of inequality, power dynamics, oppression and suppression of disenfranchised groups, as well as the invisibility of privilege.  

      This point of view became prominent in the US after the civil-rights movement (the first time we declared ourselves to be post- racial). It was during this time that racism, and genderism was transformed from something that was open and overt to something covert and hidden (sexism and disablism would soon follow). As these types of discrimination became more difficult to detect, the public perception was that we've beaten it; when the reality is that its hiding in plain sight. The false consciousness of the public regarding discrimination is so strong however, that when this type of inequality is clearly presented, it is met with harsh criticism.  Thus, the only type of discrimination that existed (counted) was the type that Fred Phelps represented: an angry fearful bigot whose vicious tirades of archaic venomous vitriol were targeted at almost anyone (except his family).  It is in this way that Fred Phelps (and his death) matter.

       While Fred was on his pulpit slinging his hate speech, picketing funerals and generally being an awful (non) human being, the rest of the US population could use him and his actions to judge and rationalize our own forms of more subtle racism and privilege.  Essentially, Fred Phelps and his nut bag bunch of "cronies" (AKA his family) became (one of) our reference groups for hate.  While he and his followers were out being the epitome of human garbage, we could rest easy because compared to him, our (generally) less overt and (more) subtle forms of discrimination and hate speech (often referred to as micro aggressions) seem inconsequential, quaint, or funny (e.g. racial/sexist jokes). But now he's dead, and can no longer be our scapegoat. We need to see this as an opportunity. 

       The opportunity that I speak of is not one to (literally) dance on his grave, or to envision the kinds of torture he might be enduring right now if Hell exists (tempting as it might be).  We need to see this as an opportunity to bring these more subtle types of racism, sexism genderism, disablism to light and be self reflexive to our own behavior that has perpetuated this institutionalization of intersectional discrimination. In this process, we will collectively find that we have participated (actively or passively) in a structure that is deeply flawed meanwhile believing that it was equal. (e.g. colorblindness). 

        The fallout of this self reflexive process will inevitably involve resistance (e.g. "I'm not Racist/Sexist but...(and other storylines)). However, with time, we may come to realize that the real flaw that we need to fix, is not so much in  individual people, but in the way that both our culture and structure has given us inadequate tools to live within the ever growing spectrum of diversity that defines our world. The death of Fred Phelps has given us a chance to recognize that inadequacy, and as long as its not squandered, we should be grateful.

Please read Tim Wise's article on the death of Fred Phelps...it's brilliant.

       

The Films of Christopher Nolan: Insomnia

        The third film in my comprehensive analysis of the films of Christopher Nolan is 2002's  Insomnia. A remake of the 1998 Swedish film by the same name, this was Nolan's first "studio" film.  That is to say, this is the first film Christopher Nolan made for a major Hollywood studio.  By many accounts in the industry, this film was a "test" to see if Nolan could handle doing a bigger picture for a wide release. Up until this point he had only done indie films.  Because of this, Nolan had far less creative control over the final product of this film than he had on previous projects, or will have on future projects. Therefore, Insomnia is the least Nolan-esque film in his filmography. However, despite studio hamstrings, there are many elements of Insomnia that have Nolan's stamp of authenticity and brilliance which makes this film (while not the crown jewel) an honorable mention in Nolan's lucrative film career.

PLOT (spoilers ahead)

     When two LA cops ( Pacino and Donavan) feel pressure from an Internal Affairs investigation, they are sent to "assist" a murder  case in Alaska as an excuse to lay low.  However, as they pursue the murderer( Robin Williams) with the help of the local police (Hilary Swank), things change rapidly. Set against backdrop of never ending daylight, as sleep deprivation sets in, perceptions of reality alter and tragedy strikes. What follows is an intense game of 'cat and mouse' that winds so tightly the only release is through a violence cinematic climax. 

 the  

    This is one of the few Nolan films that are told in a linearly regardless of the fact that Nolan himself wrote a draft of the script. Much of his work must not have been used because he did not receive a writing or story credit. This again can be attributed to Nolan being reigned in by the studio.   While there are quick cut flashbacks that are designed to jolt the audience out of the complacency that can result from poorly paced linear stories, most the of film is a progression from the beginning of the case to the end. Yet, Nolan weaves a lot of the writers predictable plot devices into a fluid tapestry of intrigue and suspense.  In that way, Nolan embodies the concept that its not what you are given, but how you use it that counts. 

      Even though most of the principle cast was chosen before Nolan was attached to direct this project, he masterfully uses lighting, angles and setting to help their actors embrace their characters.  Pacino is fantastic as Dormer, subtly showing his progressively degenerative mental state as the sleepless days and nights begin to mount. Pacino brilliantly display Dormer's stellar detective skills in the beginning and throughout the film slowly strips all that away from him with each waking hour. Robin Williams (during his dramatic Renaissance that began with 1998's Good Will Hunting) embodies creepiness and control as Finch.  His speech is slow and methodical toying with Dormer seeing him not only as a  worthy adversary but as a kindred spirit. Hillary Swank  is captivating as the young and energetic Ellie who is enamored by Dormer when he first arrives but as he descends into insomnia induced psychosis she realizes that even our mentors are human, and therefore fallible.  Swank plays this heartbreak with a clear honesty and pragmatic realism that could seemed forced or contrived in lesser hands.    

   By many critical accounts, this is the poorer of the two  Insomnia films. Critics cite the age difference of Pacino's Dormer to Stellan Skarsgard's Jonas (in the original film) and a lack of "darkness" in Nolan's version that made it difficult to watch.  However, considering that the original film is full of  rape and sexual assault (much of which perpetrated by the protagonist himself) I don't know how essential this "darkness" is when it is just code for fulfilling thinly veiled rape fantasies said critics may have embodied from the overall rape culture in the United States.

          Analysis

                              Ellie Burke: "Did you mean to shoot [Detective Eckhart]?"

                                   Dormer: " I don't know anymore."

      Throughout the film there are a lot of Nolan-esque qualities about the film that emphasis both Nolan's skill as a filmmaker and the social and cultural commentary he embeds (sometimes deeply) into all of his films.  The first interesting tidbit is  that Nolan got the name Dormer from "Dor mire" which means "to sleep.  Additionally, both Nolan uses quick cuts, sound editing, and over exposed lighting to emphasis how stress precipitates Dormer's perception and his loss of reality.  Throughout the film, Nolan treats Insomnia as a degenerative disease; showing how necessary perception is in determining the world around us.  Presenting reality in this way requires an understanding of Berger and Luckmann's notion of the social construction of reality (otherwise known as constructionism). Nolan has a history of using this concept to explain human behavior and social action.

ESTABLISHING 'TEAM NOLAN'

        This is the second film in the tenured collaboration between Christopher Nolan and Wally Pfister (the first being the previously mentioned Memento). This partnership between director and Cinematographer has spanned over a decade and includes all of Nolan's major studio work to date. For my money, Wally Pfister is the Bill Finger of cinematography, he does not get enough credit for his work (Bill Finger is the artist responsible for  a majority of the Batman comics universe but credit was stolen by Bob Kane) which is essentially making a director's film, flawless and breathtaking. He is the reason all Christopher Nolan films need to be seen in high definition ( and/or) IMAX.  I have even watched several films I have absolutely no interest in (e.g. MoneyBall) because Wally Pfister was the Director of Photography.

       It is Pfister's talent which makes Insomnia in a class above a simple crime thriller. One of the best examples of this elevation is in the opening establishing shots of the Town of Nightmute. Pfister clearly identifies the contrast between the green of the forest and the icy blue of the ice shelves but blends them seamlessly together. Another example is the scene in the fog.  Bled of almost all color (except blue) Pfister uses these tools to not only to elevate an already thrilling scene but to emphasize Dormer's perspective in order to keep the audience guessing.  Thirdly, Pfister's uses of camera angles, wipes, fades, and other visual tricks to effectively place the audience in Dormer's head.  an effect that forces the audience to make this a personal story. We can't help but put ourselves in Dormer's shoes.

     This Fall's  Interstellar will be Nolan's first film without Pfister by his side. Pfister electing to have his first directorial debut with the sci-fi thriller Transcendence released April 18.  Transcendence is not only being produced by Syncopy, Nolan's production company, but also stars a lot of actors that are Alumni of Nolan's films. I am pleased that this move by Pfister is embraced and supported by Nolan as any true friend would be.  The question remains however; since this partnership has lasted so long over the majority of his films, what is Nolan without Pfister? I do not think (like in the aforementioned Bill Finger analogy) that Nolan is a hack in love with his own celebrity as Bob Kane was. Nolan is proven to have an eye for the camera single handedly shooting Following with a shoulder mounted camera over the course of a year.  A Nolan film with or without Wally Pfister will be great...having Pfister is just added insurance.  

CONCLUSION

      This is a good film directed by Christopher Nolan.  Yet, I hesitate to call this a Nolan film due to all of the restrictions Nolan was under trying to "prove" himself to the studios that he has what it takes to make a studio picture.  However, this should not diminish the films importance or cheapen the experience of the film for the audience.  Make no mistake, in the hands of a lesser director this film would have been formulaic, boring and predictable.  Instead, we get a mindful and engrossing thriller with many twists and turns that the audience is on the edge. 

     It would have been interesting to see this film if Nolan had the same amount of creative control (which is to say all/ final cut) that he enjoys today. Perhaps we might have gotten a psychological thriller in line with "The Machinist" or anything by Arronofsky.  It must be noted that without this film, doors would have been closed to him. Without Insomnia he wouldn't have been given the chance to resurrect one of the greatest American Cultural Icons from death...Batman: and in the process create the best Superhero origin films since Richard Donner's Superman (1978).  



Guardians of the Galaxy: The Rolling Stones of the MCU

     When Marvel Studios announced Guardians of the Galaxy (GOTG) as one of their future "Phase 2" projects, I was both unaware and underwhelmed.  I had no idea who they were, and what they were about.  I, like a lot of people was a bit skeptical about a team with a walking tree (i.e. Lord of the Rings) and a anthropomorphic raccoon. Alas, as I kept hearing more buzz, I decided to check out a few back issue trades (bundled monthly issues in graphic novel form, for "the uninitiated").  Seeing as I knew the film continuity would be using characters from the re-launched team in 2008 written by Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning (consisting of Peter Quill, Drax, Gamora, Mar-Vel (Phylia Vel) Adam Warlock, Cosmo, Mantis, Rocket and Groot) I decided to start there.  What I found, was a diamond in the rough.



      Director of GOTG James Gunn said it best: "If The Avengers are The Beatles of the Marvel Universe, the Guardians are The Rolling Stones" It is true, where as The Avengers (like the image of the Beatles) are clean cut, pop, noble and likable, The Guardians are a dirty, deviant "bunch-a A-holes" with moral flexibility.  Yet, as you read their misadventures in space, you realize that this motley crew of misfits is actually a loving family. Each character cares about the others, and in their own way, would die for each other.
      All of the Guardians that will be featured in the film have a unique and complementary backstory that is filled with tragedy: Peter Quill AKA Star-Lord the half Terran (Earth) half Spartoi Prince of Spartax is constantly rebelling against his father "the jerk king of the Universe" Gamora, dubbed " the most dangerous woman in the Universe" is also rebelling against her adoptive father THANOS, Drax "the Destroyer" was genetically engineered to kill THANOS, Rocket is an alien (who just happens to look like a terran raccoon) with genetic and cybernetic enhancements from tortuous experiments, and his best friend Groot is a Alien Tree of Royal lineage. Each of these characters is the only one of their kind and that similarity binds them. Together they stop being selfish individuals and decide to make the Universe a better place...on their own terms. Even with all the drama and tragedy, these books are hilarious; chalk full of quipy humor and sight gags I haven't laughed out loud reading a book since Daniel Way's run on Deadpool. 
     With this outrageous humor, also comes even more outrageous villains.  While the Guardians regularly come up against the likes of THANOS ( and always manage to beat him), Ronan the Accuser, Nebula, The Collector, Magus, and Cronos; my favorite GOTG villains are "The Universal Church of Truth" who enslave their people to harvest their parishioners belief and transform it into their own godly power.  The Warrior Cardinals always begin a sentence with "I believe..." This a blatant analogy to the power the Roman Catholic Church once held.    
      Being the Badasses of the Marvel Cosmic, you would expect this group to be super powerful...they are far from it.  Like the crew of The Serenity in the cult show Firefly GOTG are a just a rag-tag group of "heroes" who get by with cunning, charm, strategy an oodles of luck.  Always willing to make the difficult decisions and hard choices, they are both too smart and too stupid to stay away from a fight. They are always outnumbered and usually out gunned, and still they come out on top.  
     It has been widely documented that the GOTG film is the biggest risk Marvel Studios has taken since Iron Man (for many of the reasons I've stated above, mainly its outrageous premise).  However if this pays off (to the tune of 400,000,000+) not only will Marvel continue to be undefeated at the box office, but we will get a GOTG sequel of which I want more Guardians (Cosmo, Adam Warlock, and Major Victory would be nice to see).  and Crazier villains.   However only time and money will tell.  I highly recommend picking up some of the GOTG books (especially the ones I've linked to)  to get well acquainted before the movie to maximize your enjoyment of the film. This is my Favorite Superhero team next to Justice League Dark ( which is also being adapted into a film by Guillermo Del Toro).

Please Give Guardians a chance they will grow on you (much like Groot) :)

In case you missed it, here is the first Official Trailer: Prepare to get "Hooked"

Public Sociology and the Problem of Discipline Dissection

.

In 2004, then president of the American Sociological Association (ASA) Michael Burawoy addressed a group at the ASA annual conference.  In that address he dissected Sociology into a strict division of labor (see image above).  His assertion through this talk was that while the four types of Sociology ( professional, critical, policy and public) are and should be interconnected, the notion of  "Public Sociology" has been lost.  Public Sociology   Burawoy defines as " Bringing insights gained from Sociological analysis into the public conversation about social issues and Social problems."  This topic has been hotly debated in Sociological circles, and I have decided to through my hat into the ring. 
    When I first started reading about Burawoy's Public Sociology and his dissection of the discipline, I was overcome with a feeling of futility and annoyance.  I could not (and still can't) get past how unnecessary this division seems.  First of all, if there is supposed to be a interconnection between all of these types of Sociology, why break them up to begin with?  Secondly, this idea of Public Sociology as Burawoy outlines it, is a repackaging of what most Sociologists have known as "Applied Sociology." Additionally, Burawoy also uses Millsian language from his[C. Wright Mills] seminal work The Sociological Imagination.   This is a work that any Sociologist worth her/his salt has read multiple times and considers it an important foundation for the general Sociological Perspective.  The most annoying aspect of this whole spectacle is how much attention this (repackaged uninspiringly basic idea) is actually getting.  Burawoy has made a career out of this writing papers and even creating a course at UC Berkeley titled "Public Sociology: Live" (complete with youtube channel) where he empowers young individuals to spread the sociological word to their communities without (in my opinion) proper training. 
        Burawoy becoming famous for these ideas leads me to two conclusions: One, that I am working way to hard.  If all it takes to get recognition in the field of Sociology  is to repackage and retread classical works of Sociology with little or no effort, I might as well quit writing my lectures and stop my professional development.  Two, Burawoy fails to engage in a fundamental practice of Social Research: to be Reflexive (the process a researcher goes through during a research project in which they seek out and eliminate any form of bias they may have). 
     I agree with Burawoy in one particular instance, "Professional" Sociology (Sociology in academia) as he calls it, has lost touch( many researchers write and publish only for other Sociologist in their field). However, Burawoy fails to see that he is a part of that. Only someone who is so out of touch, locked in the "ivory tower" of a four year research university, would think that all professional Sociologists are equally out of touch.  It has been my experience that Sociologists holding positions at teaching institutions, (rather than research institutions) or who are also community leaders engage in "Public Sociology" everyday.  Yet, Burawoy can't see that, because he is too busy creating complexity where there is simplicity, all for the purpose of professional validation.   

Watch the First lecture and see for yourself:

Gender Representation in Disney's 'Frozen' and Hollywood's "girl" problem.

         Last week I saw Disney's Frozen.  My initial reaction: it could have been worse.  As a Sociologist that studies gender, particularly gender representation in media ( even more specifically in film and TV).  I have had a problem with Disney's "girl" problem.  Consistently, Disney's representation of women (especially during their "Renaissance" in the late 1980's early 1990's) and the gendered messages they present to little girls have reinforced gender stereotypes and promoted dangerous relationship behavior; whether that be the promotion of body modification (i.e. plastic surgery), encouraging girls to stay with emotionally abusive kidnappers (because they'll be able to change them), being sexually passive, having no sexual agency, elitism,  sexualization (the exotic stereotype), Masculinization (reinforcement of the binary) and superficiality. Disney has been the source of gender stereotypes and maintenance of polarizing gendered expectations for over half a century. Every so often, they (Disney) would subtly and artfully repackaging these messages to fit the current target of potential consumers.  Recently however, with films like Brave, Wreck-It-Ralph, and Frozen it seems Disney is attempting to present girls ( and girl's stories) with the depth and complexity that they deserve.  While this is a step in the right direction (Brave and  Frozen being the most divergent from the "classic" Disney model), Frozen still falls into a few of the old traps and also creates new ones that set a dangerous precedent moving forward.  

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!!

Trying to Right the Ship.

       The central relationship in Frozen is between two sisters.  As with the mother/daughter relationship in Brave, this film eliminates the necessity to have a love interest (that is always male) which usually culminates into the tired princess trope of "damsel in distress". While there is a potential romantic partner for one of the sisters in Frozen, that is not the main focus of the film.  In fact,throughout the film, Disney seems to be poking fun at itself as it challenges the" love at first sight" trope meanwhile, cashing in on the audiences expectation that "true love" comes only in the form of romantic heterosexual monogamy.The "true love" in Frozen is platonic sisterly love; a welcomed change of pace for Disney. 

       With Frozen, Brave (and to a lesser extent Wreck-it Ralph) we are finally getting a handful of Disney female protagonists that do not have to be in a relationship or be married in order to be considered complete or live "happily ever after". These changes are necessary in order to display the female characters (in Disney films) as far more three dimensional than its predecessors as well as represent the cultural shift that gives and maintains female social agency.  While it is important to encourage Disney to maintain this current trajectory, it is important to understand context.  Female autonomy and agency in Disney animated films is in its infancy (beginning only in 2012) while award-winning animation directors like Hayao Miyazaki have pioneered and championed such ideals since 1974. I don't think Disney should be praised for being late to the party (nearly 40 years late).  Quite the contrary, their prolonged reluctance to embrace egalitarian ideals should change the outlook on the aforementioned films as outliers, exceptions, rather than the new rule.  

New (old) Traps 

     As structurally progressive as Frozen's story might seem, it still falls into a few old gender traps. The main gender trap that Frozen  falls into is female representation; both in the way that female character's are drawn and how they are portrayed.  Firstly, the women in Frozen are drawn out of proportion.  The eyes of the characters are bigger than their wrist. Drawing female characters with big eyes has been used in other types of animation (typically anime) to represent youth and innocence that borders on child-like ignorance.  In fact, if you look at the newer films like Brave, Frozen and Wreck-It Ralph the majority of female characters have larger eyes than their male counterparts, repackaging the idea that women are more innocent and childlike.  

      Secondly,  the character of the Ice Queen and her powers is an allegory to how women are treated and controlled in our culture.  As a child, she is portrayed as being out of control (with her powers) a label that is often applied to women in our culture who are different or speak out or speak up.  She is then locked away from the outside world, seen as a danger to herself and to others.  Women constantly get this message that the world outside is a scary place and they need to be protected from it (usually by men) or protect themselves through isolation (not going to bars and club, changing their behaviors) because, if not, they are often blamed for their own victimization. 

   Finally, once the Ice Queen in Frozen  is starting to control her powers and gain confidence in her self and her abilities she is almost immediately given a new (more sexy) dress and is drawn moving in a more sensual manner with long strides and swaying hips.  While this could be an analogy to the direct and positive correlation between sexual agency and confidence, it comes off as an unnecessary sexualization, that now a woman has power, she must be objectified. This is a common tactic by the media, controlling women's bodies and controlling women through their bodies.

    About half way though my viewing of the film I tested the films "progressiveness" by gender swapping the roles.  I asked myself, if the sisters were two brothers, would they be treated the same?  The answer...NO. If the Ice Queen was a boy, he would  have been trained to hone is powers and his skills (most likely through the typical "hero's journey) and in the end he would have redeemed himself in the eyes of his people by defeating a snow wizard or beast etc).  However, not only does this film fall into some old gender traps, it also adds to a growing problem in  gender representation that can have disastrous consequences.

A Dangerous Precedent

  Frozen, along with Brave are a part of a growing subtle form of sexism that is going undetected by both the casual observer and the scholar. 

   "Have it all" Sexism is a term that refers to a new type of sexist female representation in the media that requires female characters that are shown to have careers (with varying degrees of power), agency and  autonomy or who are being portrayed as physically strong, and strong willed, must also identify (or in some cases learn to identify) with traditional female gender norms and scripts.  The message is that it is OK for girls to have agency and social power in our society as long as they don't forget that they also have to be wives and mothers (i.e. sex objects and reproductive vessels.) This maintains the value of women to be in their body, and their representation as full and complete human beings is a distant second. One of the best examples of this is in Brave where Marida is allowed to be a warrior as long as she is also a lady. This "noble lady" motif is also used in Frozen.  Being a lady, is usually translated in these films as maintaining cis (traditional, binary specific) gender norms. Therefore, you see Marida in Brave and the sisters in Frozen doing a lot of action and adventuring while still wearing a dress, heels and make-up...emphasizing that even though they may be engaging in typically masculine activities, they haven't lost their femininity.  We see this with Superheros all of the time: from Catwoman's heels in The Dark Knight Rises to Katniss Everdeen's Wedding dress in Catching Fire.  "Have it all" sexism makes sure that we don't forget that "strong women" are also "ladies". This creates a frustrating double bind for women that is paralleled in what Arline Hochschild calls "the second shift": the idea that while women can have careers, they are still primarily responsible for all child care and domestic work...Thus women can be complex and diverse as long as they maintain societal cultural stereotypes.

    We are starting to see more and more evidence of "have it all" sexism and its effects. From a manufactured crisis of women losing domestic skills, to more professional women feeling the desire to maintain domestic activities (cooking baking and sewing) to cope with the stress of their careers; the validation of women is still only through one particular lens...their value to others rather than the value to themselves.

   A much more scary outcome of this "have it all" Sexism is how it relates to sexual violence. Because women are gaining more power and agency it is being framed in our culture as taking that power away from boys and men.  The most mild response to this ( female agency) is a manufactured boy crisis where boys and men become the only demographic that matters.  This is perfectly illustrated by the titles of films like Tangled (the story of Rapunzel) and Frozen ( the story of the Ice Queen).  The titles of the films were changed from the source material because Disney didn't want to alienate their "boy market" with a story that was so blatantly about girls.  The most extreme response to this (female agency) is the use of sexual violence and humiliation (revenge porn, street harassment, rape etc.) as a way for boys to "take back the power" from these women who have emasculated them.  Thus, in this context, rape and sexual violence is rationalized and justified as a pathway to regaining masculinity.

   More needs to be written about "have-it all" sexism and we need to be more vigilant in identifying the examples and the sources of this growing problem. 

The Films of Christopher Nolan: Memento

        The second film in my in-depth analysis of the the films of Christopher Nolan.  Is the engrossing twisting thriller Memento.  With such a riveting and complex story as Following ( Nolan's first film) one might think that Christopher Nolan would fall into a sophomore slump, relying on some of the same plot devices and story telling gimmicks that were in his first film.  However, with Memento, Nolan proves that he can consistently create an engaging film experience, one that changes with each additional viewing. 
       The plot of the film is deceptively simple.  A man, Leonard (Guy Pierce) is trying to track down the men responsible for the rape and murder of his wife. He is aided in this quest by Teddy ( Joe Pantoliano) and Natalie ( Carrie- Anne Moss). However there are a few plot devices that make this simple story into a serpentine labyrinth of  manipulation, double-crosses, and a questioning of reality.

"Do I lie to myself to be happy?" Leonard  

         

         The first plot device that Nolan uses that elevates the film to something extraordinary is Leonard's state of mind.  Ever since the attack on his wife, Leonard has been diagnosed with anterograde amnesia . Simply put,  Leonard has short term memory loss; he can't make new memories.  Throughout the film he has to rely on pictures ( and other "mementos") and his own hand written notes to fit the pieces of the puzzle (that is his life) together.  As the film progresses, Nolan illustrates just how fragile our memory can be by showing how these things can be manipulated to alter Leonard's behavior and his understanding of the world around him.   Leonard's story then becomes Nolan's allegory to how dependent memory is on interpretation and context.  This idea is rooted in Sociology, specifically in the theoretical framework of Social Constructionism.

" What is real, is real in its consequences."



           Introduced in the United States by Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann in the book entitled The Social Construction of Reality, Social constructionism understands that our knowledge (and by extension our very reality) is based upon a set of social conditions that are interpreted by individuals.  If those interpretations are collectively understood by a group of people they become "real" to that group.  Everyday behavior, as well as complex moral and philosophical ideas of good and evil, right and wrong, are all socially constructed and context dependent.  What is good and moral in one part of the world at one particular point in history, may be immoral and wrong in another part at another time.  The only reason anything has meaning is because it is given meaning by individuals. Once that is established, that meaning needs to be agreed upon and passed down to the next generation through the process of social learning known as socialization. At that point, reality is constructed.  Nolan shows the audience how easy this constructed knowledge can be altered and thereby change our perceptions of the world and our actions within it.  With that, Nolan forces the audience to take on the Sociological perspective in examining their own life in how dependent we are on our own perceptions.  This plays on a common question: "Would I have made the same decision ( or acted differently) if I would have more (or less) information?" While in our world hindsight is 20/20; in Nolan's story there is no hindsight, there is only the present, only the reality that Leonard is actively creating.  At the film's climax the audience realizes the dangers of this unchecked social construction due to a lack of self reflection (or in Leonard's case, an inability to be self reflexive).

            The second plot device that makes Memento an extraordinary film is Nolan's used of a reverse chronology storytelling.  With a few rewound shots in the beginning of the film, Nolan cements in the audiences mind that the events of the film are happening in reverse order.  Helped by overlapping the end and beginning of a particular scene the audience is not only trying to understand the story, but they are piecing the plot and character's together along with Leonard as if they were in Leonard's mind.  This device allows for thrilling character reveals and plot twist that would be seen as boring and predicable if told in a linear fashion.  I would go so far as to say the film only works because of this device.  It takes a clear picture and turns it into a jigsaw puzzle with missing pieces.  In fact, the only reason the audience can be "self reflexive" as previously mentioned, is because they have gone on this journey with Leonard and unlike him, they carry the weight and consequences of his actions...something that he can never do.
             Memento is the film that brought Christopher Nolan to the attention of the mainstream.  It was a huge critical success and opened a lot of doors for him to make a lot of his subsequent work. This film was so lauded by critics that there are many who believe that this is where he peaked, and all of his other films are pale imitations of this success.  I disagree.
           While I believe this film to be brilliant and sociologically relevant, it only serves as a taste of Nolan's capabilities as a writer and a director.  While there are similarities between Memento and the rest of Nolan's work in  tone, and theme they are not the same film because he asks different questions about the human condition and our capacity to understand both ourselves and the social world around us.  That, in part, is what makes him great.