Benny's original blog post can be found here:
http://whatispopculture.blogspot.com/2011/04/which-apocalypse-would-you-prefer.html
I think that the easier apocalypse would be the first. If my fate were in the hands of a higher being, then I would not have to really do much. I won’t say I’m righteous, but whether I am or not is the only thing that appears to be important. In the moment of the rapture, I would not suddenly be able to change myself into being a righteous person. The chance that I am not going to be taken is almost equal to the chance that I will be affected by a looming crisis and will not survive in the second option. (This I deduce by probabilistic inductive logic). Therefore the chance that I am going to be stuck in a battle and suffer hardships is pretty much the same.
I would like to point out that both options include the probability of a savior who will come to save this world, whether they are already in it or not. Now the first points to Jesus Christ, and the second points to an unknown savior. Another reason I think I’d prefer the first evangelical apocalypse is because of the known saviour. History has indeed shown us a man named Jesus Christ did indeed exist, and it has been proclaimed that he has done many great things. However, the second option could be anyone, or even no one. I’d much rather take my chance with the reality of a saviour than an apocalypse where the end is much more unclear.
Crises facing humanity are not always easily resolved, nor do they always end well. And I definitely agree with what your problem with Oswalt’s reading for the week. You also used a great example of the zombies to prove your point.
All Apocalyptic Thinking: The Present Time is The Worst Time
Growing up, I constantly heard people say the generation I was in was the worst, that things couldn’t get worse. But often they did. This idea that we are currently living in the final stage of life, where the world will eventually end, did not really make sense to me. I don’t think I was ever convinced that an apocalypse would really occur. I believed that an idea of an apocalypse served many purposes: to help those who were in distress by giving them hope, encourage those who are religious to remain steadfast and be in constant repentance, gives the religious a promise of vindication and redemption, and overall helps authorise a message.
The paradox of the apocalypse is that all attempts and beliefs of the apocalypse all try to predict the time of the end of the world. We saw examples of this, not only in our real life current day, but also in the Simpsons episode watched in class. Again and again, end of world predictions have failed to actually take place. What shocks me is the amount of people who truly believe that a particular time or day will fulfil an end time prophecy.
Looking back in history, we have been able to see how there have been prophesies that are fulfilled. So I won’t say the end of the world will never happen. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if it did. Considering so many people are expecting it to happen, makes me more likely to validify the apocalypse. However, that being said, I do not believe we can ever truly know in advance when the world will end. Nor can we say the present time is the worst time. It can probably get worse, and who knows, it might even get better.
Top 10 Failed Apocalyptic Predictions:
More Failed End of the World Predictions:
Some of the failed predictions of the end of the world during 2006:
Response to Benny's blog post “The irony of the pro-life debate”
Original Blog can be found here: http://whatispopculture.blogspot.com/2011/04/irony-of-pro-life-debate.html
I completely agree that abortion is quite a controversial issue. Unlike yourself, I am however on the pro life side. By being pro life, I believe abortions are wrong and to me an abortion is the murder of a child. With this in mind, understand that my justification against abortion is because of the life of the child, when the safety of the mother is not at risk. Despite of the idea that there are only two common views on abortion (pro choice and pro life), I’d argue that there are many different ways individuals portray and express these opinions.
You wrote about the irony of pro life views, and one of the examples you used were of particular Christian pro life campaigns that use violence. I agree that this does show irony with their beliefs, but I don’t think that you can correlate all pro life beliefs to the violence that some Christian campaigns portray. Many others, myself included, would be against personal violent actions or attacks towards abortion clinics. That being said, I think I would have the freedom to belief the abortion is wrong, reasons which I haven’t gotten into here.
The last thing I would like to question is about what you considered the most ironic about pro life Christian movement. You mentioned that Christians are big on protecting family values, however I do not really see how you concluded this, and would just question what would make you say that Christians withhold family values and if so how they do this. That being said, your example plays an effective role in exemplifying what you said.
Abortions: The Last Television Taboo
Brought up in class was the topic of abortions, and I was not that surprised to note that abortions are a topic quite under represented on television. This is quite a contrast to media representation on television, one shown to have much of an over representation seen in the earlier discussion on Media and Violence. In class, the statistic given was that there were 9 abortions in 40 years on television, whereas abortions are generally a phenomenon that occurs at least once a day.
I actually went and looked up stats for age groups of abortions, because I have generally believed that abortions were mostly done by teenagers who were unable to support and raise a child. I suppose my reasons for believing this come from only seeing representations of abortions with teenagers in media, and from the fact that the only people I personally know who have had abortions were teenagers. I was actually quite surprised to realize that the numbers of abortions done by older women are greater than the amount of abortions by teenagers. [I know statistics are not completely accurate, but it gives us an estimate idea of the amounts of abortions per age group.]
During class, abortions were shown to reinforce many racial and sexual stereotypes. During the Friday Nights Live episode, one can see how being white in a particular social class will play a huge role in the determination of having an abortion. The reading from Press and Cole also suggest that although additional factors, such as emotions and circumstances, play a huge role in the struggle women who are considering abortion take, one of the greatest factors will include the social class of the women. The reading showed that women of higher social class generally were less likely to consider the option of having an abortion, compared to the women of lower social class. This is similarly portrayed in the episode of Friday Nights Live, where we can see Becky’s social status and her decision to abort her child compared to Tami’s birth of her child and Tami’s higher social status.
Response to Jackie's Blog Post "Do Zombies Make Us More Relgious?"
Would the truly pious lose all faith in their respective religions because of this ungodly event and would the former atheists suddenly develop an interest in saving grace of God?
http://jackiejesusblog.blogspot.com/
I definitely did not see that question addressed in “The Walking Dead” or in other monster movies I have watched. In the panic and chaos of what’s going on all around them, the last thing I have noticed is characters turning to religion. At the same time, I have not seen characters denying God and turning away from Him. In fact, I wonder very much how we as people would react in the event that zombies (or any other monsters) took over our world.
Religion is a huge part of the vast majority of people’s lives. How different would a struggle against monsters be compared to struggles we face every day? Could we predict that people who turn to religion in times of current struggles would turn to God if our world was overtaken by zombies? And then would those who do not believe in God remain in their belief that God does not exist? I do not know if this will be the case, or if our beliefs would flip completely.
What I think is interesting, and would like to note, is that both types of people believe the other group will switch beliefs. The God-fearing people believe that the people who have yet to believe in God will suddenly realize that God is real. And the people who deny God’s existence appear to think that those who believe in God will lose faith in what they believe. This is what my impression is from talking to others.
http://jackiejesusblog.blogspot.com/
I definitely did not see that question addressed in “The Walking Dead” or in other monster movies I have watched. In the panic and chaos of what’s going on all around them, the last thing I have noticed is characters turning to religion. At the same time, I have not seen characters denying God and turning away from Him. In fact, I wonder very much how we as people would react in the event that zombies (or any other monsters) took over our world.
Religion is a huge part of the vast majority of people’s lives. How different would a struggle against monsters be compared to struggles we face every day? Could we predict that people who turn to religion in times of current struggles would turn to God if our world was overtaken by zombies? And then would those who do not believe in God remain in their belief that God does not exist? I do not know if this will be the case, or if our beliefs would flip completely.
What I think is interesting, and would like to note, is that both types of people believe the other group will switch beliefs. The God-fearing people believe that the people who have yet to believe in God will suddenly realize that God is real. And the people who deny God’s existence appear to think that those who believe in God will lose faith in what they believe. This is what my impression is from talking to others.
Makes me think about what would happen, if it is even possible, for the world to end.
Monsters and the Character of God
I grew up in a family, where watching movies with monsters were generally discouraged. Monster movies were always considered a negative influence, yet in our last class we learnt about how monsters tell us a lot about ourselves. Monsters show us how to become human because we can see how much they strive to be truly redeemed. Goodness and evil are themes that come up quite often in many different types of movies, including movies about zombies, vampires, ghosts or werewolves.
Looking at vampires and zombies, two types of monsters studied in class, one can easily see the sociophobic that they can represent. Vampires and zombies both lie between life and death, representing our fear of death and dying badly. Death is such a big fear, because what happens after death is unknown. Dying badly can be painful. Most of us do not want to experience pain that could kill us.
Understanding the character of God can be told by two opposing ways. Either you can talk about what God is, or you can talk about what God is not. Monsters act as a representation of what God is not. Although growing up not watching monster movies, I have come to realize I can learn a lot from them. The way we portray these monsters can show us our own perception of the character of God.
I always wonder how humanity would actually look under threat. I mean, we see different situations of monsters portrayed in media, but would we truly react the way characters on screen would react? Looking at media studies, would we react like characters on screen just because that is how we have learnt from them to react?
It was mentioned in class that if zombies were to take over the world, we should fend for ourselves and leave the weak behind. What does this tell us about the character of God? Is this a counter actual argument where there is such a world that is caring towards weak and the needy?
Response to Elona’s blog post “Media Violence in Cartoons”
Elona's original blog found here:
http://ekhoy.blogspot.com/2011/03/media-violence-in-cartoons-yesterday-my.html
I agree with all the points you made about how great violence is in cartoons, for it is definitely overly exaggerated! So many times, I encounter my younger cousins hitting each other and throwing things, and when asked why: they often respond that they saw someone on television do something similar. Even though I do not believe we should assume the link between violence and media, I believe that violence in children’s programs should be greatly decreased.
Children are very susceptible and liable to intake and learn from what they see or hear from media than someone who is not young. The older we are, the more firm our ideals and beliefs are. With children, many of them have yet to understand the difference between right and wrong; morals do not occur to them. If they learn how to inflict violence at a young age, it becomes harder for them to not to be disposed to violence.
Another factor that needs to play into consideration is the environment the children are raised up in. Children are impressible and learn quite quickly, and media is (in most cases) not going to be the only thing that contributes to what they are taught. Therefore, several other factors must be taked into account when trying to make assumptions between the link between violence and media in regards to children.
Here’s a clip from Happy Tree Friends – a pretty gruesome/violent cartoon --- (the others are worse)
Violence in Media
Every time I turn on the television, or listen to the radio, I see violence. The argument is often made that media is used to spur on violence; that the increase in violence is a result of the increase of available media sources. However, I’d argue that the amount of violence is not increased because of media, but rather that media has been used to emphasize and increase our knowledge of violence to make us more aware of the violence around us.
Professor Harris uncovers some false impressions about the number of homicide rates that occur in reality compared to the amount that is portrayed on television. This reinforces the idea that media places a huge emphasis on violence, to a point where it is commonly over exaggerated.
The news alone, an example that came up again and again in class, strongly shows us violence at every given opportunity. Generally speaking, what people see, will be what is assumed about the on goings of the world we all live in. The news is something we rely on, and consequently we assume and conclude that most of our world is represented in the news. In reality, the news only portrays a small portion of what our world is like.
Violence is commonly viewed as a negative fixation, yet it is still seen that many of the plenty of positive aspects of violence are similarly portrayed through media. Examples of this encompass sports such as hockey, or even heroic acts seen as a bystander reacting with violence to ‘save’ someone.
All this violence, whether good or bad or neither (for violence is such a complex term to define) makes me wonder why we as humans are so attracted to it when it appears in media.
Some Examples
Some Examples
Toronto police say murder-suicide cause of four deaths in east-end home
Panhandler faces second degree murder charges in stabbing
One of four panhandlers charged in the stabbing death of Ross Hammond will now face second-degree murder charges, Toronto police said Thursday.
Violence in Toronto's schools is citywide: report
Dogs recommended to sniff out guns in student lockers
Response to Josh’s blog post “If Sports is Religion, Then I Must Be Job”
Well, first thing I would like to note is that we have similar favourite teams! (But that’s pretty irrelevant to my response).
We all know the story of Job, right? Pious man tested by God to see if he will still worship him despite God allowing Satan to inflict tremendous punishment on Job. Why am I the sporting equivalent of Job?
I definitely think you pulled up an interesting comparison between yourself and Job, however I believe there are even more differences. In view of this, although you may be similar to Job, I would not consider you a Job.
Job was a man who had a lot, he started out with many sons and daughters and thousands of possessions. If you look at these teams, and the idea of sport being your religion, I would venture to ask what has it tremendously ‘blessed’ you with? Can you say that these teams you are a fan of at one point produced masses of championships? You said yourself, that you were not even alive the last time some of these teams won championships. Even though you said you had it ‘pretty good’, Job was considered to have the best.
In Job, the devil is portrayed to have a conversation with God, telling God that Job would not honour or worship God without all the masses of the blessings and possessions given to him. This becomes why Job suddenly faces all these trials, a true testing of faith. There is a reason to why God allows the devil to inflict suffering on Job. Is there a reason to why the ‘sporting gods’ decided to test your faith? Were you going to be able to be used to show something significant?
Lastly, Job was quite different than the average person. I mean, if what happened to Job was real, then I know that there would be no way I would be able to react the same way in patience and without complaining. In the end, you equated yourself with all the other sports fans. Job was definitely not easily equated to any other person who might have gone through similar trials.
All that said, it was definitely an interesting comparison, and I like your enthusiasm and optimism. =)
Sport as Religion
Many times, in this class and elsewhere, the idea of sport being a religion comes up. It’s been looked at in Trothen’s, Scholes’ and Bain-Selbo’s articles, and discussed in this class. The idea of sports taking a position in people’s lives, comparable to religion, has been greatly studied and many connections made.
I think it’s fair to say sports can play a huge role in people’s lives, something similarly seen by looking at the importance of religion in one’s life, however these several parallels made between the two does not necessarily mean sport takes over and acts as religion. In most cultures, because religion is such a dominant factor, many things, like sports, stem out from it. A basic definition of religion explains three functions of religion being its social function, hermeneutic function, and transcendence function. (From Lynch’s article).
Sport definitely plays quite a social function for most people who follow or have an interest in sports. Sport creates social communities, where a collective experience drives a large amount of energy, most participants involved as a group. As a fan of sports, I love being at hockey, baseball, or football games. It’s one of the best ways for me to socially connect with my own brother. On the other hand, the idea of sports providing meaning, as a hermeneutic function, is not something I can relate to. Yes, I am a sports fan, but a sport is not my life. The argument is often made that sports become the life of their fans, and that sports teach life lessons on winning, losing, struggles, challenges, etc. Even though this may be true of some sports followers, I do not think it is the case with all or most sport fans (including myself). This makes is a lot harder for me to believe sport can act as a religion in my life. The last role of religion, of a transcendent being is something I definitely do not agree sport has. Does sport really experience any transcendence?
Bain-Selbo wrote about all words that described sports and depicted that they were similar words to describe any religious experiences with transcendence. In spite of this, there are numerous and countless other situations or experiences where equivalent words can be used to illustrate or express quite different things. I believe this shows an ineffective and weak argument, which is why I cannot perceive that sports can function completely like religion.
I believe all these parallels and connections between sports and religion can cover and explain part of religion, but not religion as a whole.
Response to Georgia’s blog post “JB as JC Doesn’t Fly With Me”
"I know I might be excessively hating on Bieber right now, but I can't take this whole thing seriously. He's a manufactured, cookie-cutter, marketed child pop star."
I think it’s a harsh judgment to say “Who is Justin Bieber trying to be by showing extreme poverty of third world countries when in reality, he hasn't even seen it with his own two eyes?” and use that as an argument against him is portraying them through his music video. Reality is, there are tons of people who have not been in, or ever experienced what a third world country is like. But does this mean they should not talk about them? Or support them? Or try to make a difference in the way they can? How can we fully know that Justin Bieber is one of these “celebrities [who] unabashedly use third world imagery to primarily stir up emotions in viewers without any real resolution”? I don’t think it is fair to make this assumption. If I had musical talent and truly cared about my world, I would try to promote it in ways that I could. Regarding your point about only 1$ of each ticket going towards “Pencils of Promise”, if you look at many other people around us, I believe that all those $1 dollars will amount to much more than the average person gives regularly.
I was born in Kenya, spent my last summer in Colombia, and am going to South Asia this summer – and I have been exposed to many of the sufferings that people experience in third world countries. But unlike you, I was encouraged to see a pop star raising awareness through his music video, because I feel that so many of us in North America are not aware of the pain felt in other countries. There are many times when I try talking to my own sister (13 years old) about these issues, and she has put on view of apathy. My hope is that all these fans of Justin Bieber will be inspired or motivated to do more and try to change the world in the way they can.
Will Justin Bieber continue to be this ideal role model? I don’t know. I can’t guarantee he won’t turn out to become like the other celebrities you mentioned. But I won’t doubt yet.
All this hating on Justin Bieber ...
I believe Justin Bieber, a 17 year old Canadian pop artist and teen idol, is more of an ideal star than many others out there right now. From my previous knowledge, I had quite a negative impression of Justin Bieber. To be honest, I didn’t know much about him at all, except that if anyone asked me if I did like him, my immediate response would have been absolutely not. I think this is because my impression of him came from my friends and peers who are always talking about how much they don’t like him. Now that I think about it I never really asked why, I suppose I just assumed that no one - except little kids, like my 13 year old sister - really paid much attention to him. Now, and asking around, I realized people really don’t have legit reasons to why they don’t like him. I’ve come to the conclusion that it appears that many are just jealous that being so young, he has made it pretty big with his talents. (Actually, I’m sure there are other reasons as well, I just haven’t thought of them yet.)
Looking at how much influence Justin Bieber has on different social media is quite startling. In fact, despite some of the comments been made against Justin during class, I think that what he is doing is pretty amazing. Feels awkward saying that, but, like someone said in class – I’d much rather my sister be following Justin Bieber than many other pop stars out there right now. In fact, seeing his music video, “Pray” made me respect him. He’s a huge star already, and he doesn’t have to choose to portray this image of hospitality if he really didn’t care. Donating money made from his music video, becoming actively involved in many things, and even just spreading awareness of issues in this world are amazing things Justin Bieber has done.
I heard the argument made in class of Justin Bieber just doing these things to give himself a good image, but I think that is easy for us to say as we sit and analyze every motive of his. Even if that is his only reason – which I don’t believe it is – I still think he influences many younger people in a positive way. Justin Bieber provides ways for them to learn about social issues around them, and he can be seen as an inspiration to motivate others to change this world.
I know I am someone who want to change this world, and I will do what I can to make this happen.
And I think it’s cool that Justin Bieber is using his own talents to promote pretty good things in the way he can.
Response to Jackie’s blog post “Television can help cultivate a child’s mind”
“The negative connotations people attribute to television and children such as it being a replacement baby-sitter, taking away from the responsibility of parents and acting as a sedative are false. If the children are watching the right programs that teach them things it helps their minds flourish which later in life will allow them to create beautiful things. Parents allowing their children to watch the right kids' shows is a healthy and important aspect which will help a child's mind develop to a creative and intelligent adult mind.”
http://jackiejesusblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/television-can-help-cultivate-childs.html
Although part of me agrees with the above statements you made, I don’t completely agree with you. I do believe television can play an important role in developing imagination and learning – both which are desperately needed in our society today. Television has indeed played an enormous role in learning many facts, issues, ideals, and occurrences that we encounter every day in our lives. Furthermore, we are constantly increasing our thoughts and widening our knowledge through many of the different television shows on TV. However, there are programs which might not necessarily help children’s minds to flourish or create beautiful things, and quite often I see the television turned on to any random show to distract and calm down children.
My extent of television shows is quite limited, as I did not grow up watching much television, but I work with children, and I see and hear many things that television has portrayed to them. I definitely don’t think all television shows are bad, nevertheless if children are watching shows that are not beneficial programs, what they learn and how they imagine is going to be reflected. I see this strongly, especially in my cousins. As much as I love my two younger cousins – ages 5 and 9 – they often can be tough and wild to handle. I have seen many times when either their parents or mine want quiet and peace, and resort to turning on the television. This immediately catches my cousins’ attentions and they are captivated to whatever show is playing. Unfortunately, often none of the adults pay much attention to what show is actually being played, or what exactly the show is about.
Like you mentioned, many of the shows you have watched have shaped your current personality. When non-idealistic shows are played, one’s personality is definitely affected by it and will be shaped accordingly. That leaves us with determining what shows are beneficial, and which ones are not. As well as the need to examine whose responsibility it is for what television shows a child views.
Metaphors for Television: Comfort and the Church
Near the beginning of last class, we started talking about metaphors for television. It was incredibly interesting to see how many people in the class had such different views and ideas of what television was to them. In Detweiller and Taylor’s writings on television, it is explained that television has evolved from one metaphor to another. However, looking at the class’s responses to what their favourite metaphors were for television, there was a huge variance in what television currently represented as. Detweiller and Taylor speak about the human condition and the nature of God being revealed through the history of television. One of the metaphors, developed throughout the history of television, which caught my attention, was television being a comfort. This is perhaps because I commonly see television being a comfort to my family and many friends. In this section, Detweiller and Taylor writes the following two statements in regards to weekly church services performing a similar function to television acting as a comfort.
“Comfort comes from familiarity, from repetition, from ritual.”
“We check in with the same people at the same time and follow the same formula each week.”
This quick interesting video that is an example showing a church service that follows a common prototype.
Going back to an insider’s approach, I can see a clear example of the missiological approach explained in Lynch’s article “Why Should Theologians and Scholars of Religion Study Popular Culture?” It is definitely interesting to see how this trend of television being a comfort is reflected through the church’s method of engaging current audiences and members.
Response to Georgia’s blog on Thoughts on Marketing
In response to Georgia’s blog on Thoughts on Marketing: http://jcandpc.blogspot.com/
“Because a brand carries such a loyal community does that mean at the end of the day, they can do no wrong?”
We, as consumers, appear to lose our own ideals and beliefs to accommodate whatever our brands do. But is this on purpose?
When I see someone wear Nike or Gap, I don’t exactly think of the sweatshops and struggles that both children and workers have to go through in order for us to wear their popular products. To be honest, if someone asked me if I knew what companies of products I use had sweatshops in third world countries, I wouldn’t be able to confidently identify most of them. Although the truths of many major businesses have become public, it is often beyond the common knowledge of many of us, top buying consumers, who are so caught up in our highly commercial culture.
When I bought my blackberry, I wasn’t exactly thinking about the war in Congo that has physically and emotionally impacted numerous innocent people just so I can have certain minerals for my phone. If I was thinking of this when I was looking to buy a new phone, I’m not sure I would have bought an iPhone or a Blackberry. If I were to buy clothes with the knowledge of the unfairness of sweatshops, I don’t think I would have much of a heart to purchase anything of particular brands.
It makes me wonder how aware we are ourselves, as consumers, of the ideals behind the brands we support.
Whose responsibility is this?
It makes me wonder how aware we are ourselves, as consumers, of the ideals behind the brands we support.
Whose responsibility is this?
The Conscience of Advertising
Sometimes when I see advertisements, whether on the internet, television, subway posters, or even the radio, I can’t help but incredibly laugh and poke fun at how pretentious some of them appear to be. Yet, despite this, they work. In fact, they work quite unbelievably well. Looking at the history of advertising and how it has developed over the years to continue to grasp our attention towards consumption continues to amaze me.
What surprises me the more than anything is the current trends advertising appear to be taking, this idea of spiritual advertisement. Ultimately, as humans, what do we truly desire and crave? Is it really the temporary satisfactions that products seem to give us? Or is it something more?
Here’s an example of a Nike Ad that takes this spiritual approach looking at Good and Evil to promote its products.
James Twitchell’s article, One Market Under God, speaks about Christianity being a brand, selling ‘heaven’ parallel to products being sold in today’s culture. Twitchell makes a point showing examples to confirm “the early apostles of advertising, [were] among the most important ministers of commerce with deep evangelical roots…” It makes me wonder why Christians have this power he speaks about. “Power of the story. Power of Promise.” Why are they so affective in catching people’s attentions? I believe it’s because they have a better grasp on what humans essentially crave.
I sense that so often we choose not to ask ourselves questions about spiritual things, but rather focus on physical and material things. The idea of the newest form of advertising arising, the spiritual aspect to advertisements, is effective. Nowadays, since spirituality is commonly left out of our lifestyles, when a ‘high concept’ ad is shown, speaking to the meaning of life rather than the actual product, we are drawn in to this psuedospiritual feature.
Have, instead of going to God, we let our longings and values be filled with consumer goods that are temporary?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)