Reflection #3 Herr

WOW. That's what really sums up my impression from the Herr article. I knew before reading that it was going to be dramatically different and would be more graphic. But I when he talked about how he almost an EAR and a solider 'supposedly' licking his bayonet, oh man. There is obviously a huge gap between the Pyle and Herr article.

The difference I feel is due to not only the popularity of the wars but also the nature of the wars. WWII we lost more men, but Vietnam hit home harder because of the coverage it got not only by embeds like Herr, but Video. The body count every night after the evening news. WWII was a far thought in the distance, while Vietnam was in your face and there was no way to ignore it. Another major differences that I noticed between the two articles that you could feel Herr's emotions more and Pyle seemed to make everything lite and airy, probably to again keep the public involved and engaged with the war.

This article is a real representation of the time and really leaves no questions, Vietnam and any war is a real mess, regardless of intentions.

Reflection #2

I found today's lecture particularly interesting.  I know many people protested the Vietnam War (or conflict rather) and believed it was a mistake, but I believe that McNamara's reflection on the war and the many mistakes made throughout (the first mistake engaging in war) truly legitimizes that Vietnam was a conflict based on bad decisions.  As Professor Hass mentioned, the fact that McNamara is bold enough to look back upon the choices he made throughout the Vietnam Conflict as Secretary of War, shows that although he did not realize his mistakes at the time, he can reflectively look back and point out poor decisions made throughout the war.  I also think that McNamara's releasing of the film in 2003 - during the Iraq War - shows that McNamara sees similarities between the two conflicts and hopes that his realization of past mistakes will be noticed by others (e.g. the current government and/or secretary of war) and not be made again.  

I also think that it is interesting that there were many false pretenses of attack (e.g. the August 4 attack in the video) that were later confirmed as false, yet our defenses jumped on the war bandwagon before confirmation (or on the ambiguous presumption that: "We were definitely attacked... I think").  I think that the quotation from the video "Belief and seeing are both often wrong," has significance in this situation because if you want to believe something so badly (e.g. the U.S. forces thinking they were attacked by Vietnamese) you will see it (the sonar people thought that they picked up a missile attack when indeed they did not).

I also think that the concept of the domino effect - although it seems like it could be plausible - was a false assumption.  As McNamara said in the video of his conversation with the Vietnamese official - the Vietnamese would fight the Chinese until death - they would not simply "fall" as a domino would to communism.  Another reflection on the domino effect is perhaps a current day domino effect in the middle east in terms of the spread of terrorism.  The U.S also has a kind of counter-domino effect belief if you will - that if we spread democracy to Iraq, other Middle Eastern Countries will fall to Democracy.  

In conclusion, all wars will have opposition of some  kind, and the fact that McNamara, the Secretary of War during the Vietnam Conflict, is willing to acknowledge he was wrong, the terms in which he was wrong, and just how wrong he was, really validates that Vietnam was waged and conducted under false pretenses and drawn from unjust conclusions.  I am looking forward to reading the Herr reading to be able to compare his disoriented (as described by Professor Hass) dispatches of the Vietnam conflict and comparing it to Pyle's dispatch.  

Reflection #3

I really enjoyed the Jo Ann Gibson Robinson reading. Like pretty much everyone else, I was unaware of her role in the Montgomery Bus Boycott. I'm glad we got to read another side of the story and really see where the origin of the movement came from. The more I think about it though, the more in annoys me that people don't know this part of the story and she is not more well known for her role in it, like Rosa Parks is. It says in the beginning of the reading that the editor and her met in April 1984 and I assume the book was published shortly after. So there had been over 20 years for this story to popularize, yet still not many people know about it.
My high school prided itself on diversity and learning about human rights all over the world so we do not repeat the same mistakes we have. We even had an entire year long interdisciplinary study on the 60's and the Vietnam Era, with a large portion of it spent on civil rights. Therefore, I'm actually kind of surprised I didn't learn about Robinson's story earlier.
I wish I had learned about her story earlier and I wish it was more popular so other people know her story too. Of course, what we learn about Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. is extremely important, but I think it is also equally important to know the true origin of the movement and honor the people who were behind the scenes and doing extremely important work.

Reflection 4

I have tried to consider the discussion question for this week that we didn't address in class. The question is: "How has standing up to the government helped to form the national "we"? How does the idea of dissent coordinate with our idea of national identity in terms of the Chicano Movement and the Black Civil Rights Movement?"

In previous discussions we have considered 'common enemies' as a strong unifying force. I have also considered that our nation has a reactive identity, where opposition to a movement or to an idea unifies an anti-party (anti-communism, for instance). In a pre-midterm reading, one of the books considered the idea that Americans tended to define themselves by what they were not, but rarely address what/who they were; much like a process of elimination, if an American wasn't this than he/she would act like that often causing an anti-movement. We see this within America as well. The consumer republic warranted anti-movements within our borders: the hippies, the religious rights groups and the environmentally sensitive Green groups. So, how then does a minority group speaking up against the government (and social norms) cohere to these ideas of national identity, or does it contradict the ideas we have considered in class thus far? 

I think that they minority groups of the time fit rather nicely into the former categories: common-enemy unification and deductive-identity unification. Much like the hippies rejected mass consumption and indulged material life, the Black Civil Rights and the Chicano Civil Rights movement rejected the standard racial hierarchies. Their movements were anti-discrimination, anti-racial superiority, anti-democracy-for-whites-only. These minority groups defined themselves on what they were not by rejecting the segregation and discrimination laws of the land. They were united by an idea of what they thought was wrong, something they were not. Although I am sure that many of the members of each movement had similar ideas on what they thought was right, it was their idea of injustice (wrong) that initiated and fueled their anti-movements.

Discussion Questions

1. What similarities can be seen in the feeling toward the Vietnam War and the Iraq War? Consider the popularity of both wars and the opposition to each.

2. As Professor Hass introduced in lecture, the Memoir of Jo Ann Gibson Robinson put the world-changing event of the Montgomery Bus Boycott on a human scale. Jo Ann Gibson Robinson’s account of the event emphasizes personal struggles and sacrifices. What are the purpose and the effects of her personal narrative? How can we relate this type of story telling to the social and cultural shifts of this time period?

3. We have spent many lectures and discussions examining the idea of national
identity and specifically the problem of “we”. How has standing up to the government helped to form the national “we”? How does the idea of dissent coordinate with our idea of national identity?

4. Preceding the Montgomery Bus Boycott, many stories circulated about the mistreatment of women on the buses. Were women the target of public discrimination? Or were the stories of women more effective in rallying the black population to fight for desegregation of the public transit systems?

5. In comparison to the Black Civil Rights Movement, why do you think that the Chicano Movement was less publicized? Do we have a strong national memory of the Chicano’s fight for equal rights?

Civil Rights

The documentary we watched today in lecture highlighted a new sense of what nationalism means to minority/immigrant groups. As Mexican-Americans were fighting for their rights to land, the activism they portrayed was a sense of collective unity of their Mexican roots and heritage. Similarly they identified with other minority groups who were also fighting for their civil rights, therefore, creating a further sense of collective identity and nationalism in regards to their minority group status. I feel that U.S. nationalism transformed through civil rights movements as a form of embracing one's cultural origins and creating awareness of the struggles their ancestors (as well as current struggles) within the white patriarchal society of America. U.S. Nationalism, along with the American national identity are not fixed, they are both fluid and change depending on the generation and societal climate of the time. As America was discovered and claimed as the "new world" it took on the identity of having to incorporate ethnic immigrants, and through civil rights movements, U.S. nationalism became a simultaneous mix of ethnic identity and American identity. The collective acknowledgement of minority groups civil rights movements introduced a collaborative sense between minority groups, when earlier in U.S. history, some minority groups were said to be hostile to newly arriving immigrant groups not recognizing the common oppressions they faced. Is there ever going to be a concrete national identity or sense of U.S. nationalism? Does America thrive on the social hierarchies that oppress members of minority groups?

Connecting My Past to My Present

Usually I go into lectures expecting to just simply take notes and try my best to relate to the topic enough to retain the information for as long as i can. This week I did not have to try as hard. The topic hit very close to home.
The video was very interesting and eye opening and while I watched, I kept asking myself if my grandmother had experienced any of the things put forth in the video. I didn't know for sure because that's not something that comes up at Christmas dinner. I had never asked her questions about her childhood with concerns of the exact location she grew up in. I knew it was in Detroit, but I had not idea there was a specific black community such as Black Bottom, therefore I figured the communities were similar to how they are now, just a little older.
After class I called my grandmother and asked her where she grew up. She told me she grew up around the Hastings Street area. That led to a rather long story about her daily routine, which included going to many of the various black owned businesses.
When I asked about things such as the building of the highways and the GI Bill and things of that nature, I received a surprising reaction. She had an air of positivity in her responses. First of all, she was not personally affected by the formation of the highway. She lived a little ways from the construction so her home was not demolished. What was taken away was her hangout spots. But still she was very pleasant about the situation. "We just hopped on the streetcar and rode down to Woodward Avenue" was how she addressed the issue.
In concerns with housing, she says that the fact that the whites were leaving Detroit, gave her an opportunity to be a homeowner. She loved the city and didn't plan on ever leaving (which she hasn't), and did not have any desire to live by whites anyways. Therefore she does not feel as though she suffered much during that time.

Reflection #2

I thought this week's lectures and discussion were very interesting and I really learned a lot. It was interesting to see where our nations obsession with buying stuff came from. Our society clearly is still concerned and obsessed with having the biggest and best things just to simply have them and show them off. It seems as if this all started in the 50's and later on with the onset of the cold war. Also, I didn't even know that the cold war was a "war" over which country had the best products. Still to this day we seem to have this competition with other countries over having the best cars and technology.
I also thought the video about Detroit was really interesting. I knew that whites fled out of Detroit and settled in metro Detroits suburbs, but I didn't know they were actually encouraged by the government and helped out by being able to purchase homes there, while African Americans were deterred from leaving the city. Growing up in metro Detroit I have seen where these different races have settled and how they have traveled from city to city following others. It is interesting to see how this all started and why and when people started moving out of Detroit.
Lastly, I travel down I-75 all the time and I had no idea the background behind the highway. I'm glad I know the story behind it now and what the city and surrounding areas had to go through when it was being built.

The Story of Stuff by Annie Leonard

Cohen concludes her “Prologue” to A Consumers' Republic with: “I hope that readers, aware of how my life has conformed to the large patterns set out in this book, will begin to contemplate how their own lives may also have been shaped by these economic, political, social, and cultural structures that reigned over the second half of the twentieth century and still are with us in many ways today… If we all are citizens and we all are consumers, how we choose to mix the two reveals a great deal about who we are as individual Americans as well as about the virtue of the America we live in at any particular moment in time” (15).

Please watch the video (see below) while thinking about the following questions:

(1) During discussion section we addressed different consumer ideologies. According to Annie Leonard, what is the current relationship between citizenship, consumerism, and nationalism? Is this an extension of the “consumers’ republic,” or something entirely different?

(2) How is our current government responding to our economic crisis?

(3) Is it un-American or un-patriotic to resist consumerism? Think of examples in your own life or around you (i.e. in the media).

(4) Any comments on the gender or racial logics addressed (or not addressed) in this film? Can you make connections to Cohen’s arguments?

(5) Any comments on the solutions Annie Leonard proposes?



You may also propose additional discussion topics/questions. And please feel free to comment on other student’s comments to this post as well.
-Isabel

Queen For A Decade? Discussion Q's (first post didn't work)

1) Minority groups, mainly African Americans and women in America, utilized their identity during the late thirties through WWII, in what ways did the White patriarchal ideal resist or change due to the protests and boycotts?

2) How did advertising and marketing work to reinforce the prescribed societal roles (especially on women) during WWII and post WWII? What implications did this create for future movements (Civil Rights, 2nd wave of Feminism) to destabilize patriarchal societal gender roles?

3) Did the consumer identity for citizens aid in creating or adding to an American national identity? If so, in what ways?

4) In what ways did the GI bill impact American post-war national identity, and how did it affect progress of an egalitarian American society?

5) How did the debate over extensions of price control divide down gender and racial lines? How were each side and their opponents depicted, and how does this relate to the destabilization of women's civic authority since the onset of WWII (pp. 134-135)?

Consumer's Republic Response

Reading "A Consumer's Republic" was an interesting and extremely relevant read to the state of our economy today. The history of consumerism and its impact on women, African Americans, working-class populations, American businesses, and so on is extremely important to understand so that when we have our own income, insurance, budget, and independent life, we can make smart decisions about our consumption and our savings. Since this book is placed in historical context that discusses government decisions, protests and boycotts, as well as the advertising of the time, it is interesting to see how mass consumption and the U.S. economy's patterns are similarly re-created today. What I found the most interesting were how women and African-Americans utilized their identity as a consumer to make a voice for themselves in the white male patriarchal social and economic climate between 1920 and the 1950s. Although the struggles for civil liberties, consumer protection, product regulation, non-discriminatory work opportunities, and public voice did not necessarily end, it is apparent, especially within the African-American population at the time, that their activism as consumer's allowed the group to propel forward into demanding civil rights. Similar to this, women attained strength as a public voice that possibly helped create better organization and attention for the 2nd wave of feminism that went through the 1970s.  One final point that i wanted to address was how the government policies and organizations that aided in consumption and economic change was vital to Cohen's book, but I also enjoyed how she addressed how the broader national changes affected the individual based on gender, race, and class. Oftentimes this can be overlooked, but being able to understand how the nation as a whole and individuals of the nation were impacted allows for a more holistic understanding of consumerism and the issues that arise from it. 

March 19th-Queen for a Decade? Discussion Q's

Redlining: Institutionalized Racism

The video that we watched in Lecture this week regarding the red lining that occurred across the Unites States was eye-opening to me not only because the film discussed the history of the freeway I-75, located in my hometown of Detroit, MI; but also because I still see the very real effects of this red lining in my community and many others around the Detroit area. As a native Detroiter, I have been exposed to the areas of extreme poverty that envelope my city--from abandoned homes to littered parks, I have become accustomed to seeing my hometown in this sad condition. After viewing the video, however, it is clear that there were actually systematic policies that led to Detroit's current crisis as whites were rewarded for moving to the suburbs and blacks were deterred from purchasing homes in white communities. 

As the video stated, many whites did not want to live amongst black neighbors because they feared that the property value of all the houses in that neighborhood would decrease. Thus, the federal government found a way to keep white future home-owners happy and free from the "problem" that the African-Americans posed. The government began making it nearly impossible for blacks to purchase homes in "green lined" areas (which were generally white homogenous areas) by restricting their ability to get loans and move into areas that did not want them. This is terribly sad as, although many African-Americans fought in the war and should have benefitted from the GI Bill, they continued to experience institutionalized marginalization and discrimination.

Another thing that the video explained was the complete destruction of the thriving black communities in Detroit in the 20s and 30s, Black Bottom and Paradise Valley. It is probably no accident that the freeway that allowed whites easy access to the downtown Detroit area to enjoy a bit of the city (I-75), simultaneously destroyed communities in which blacks were able to prosper. Of course, the bulldozing of a white neighborhood would be abominable, thus, this decision to get rid of Black Bottom and Paradise Valley demonstrates the constant attempts of the federal government to divide and segregate race and class.

Additionally, it is amazing, almost scary, to me how often I use I-75 to run errands, visit friends or just to hang out downtown. I never would have imagined that such an integral part of my daily life holds with it such deep-rooted implications. I can definitely, as Professor Hass stated, now understand these historical underpinnings and be a more educated and more knowledgeable individual for that. Needless to say, I am glad I saw the video and cannot help but be aware of Detroit's history from now on. It was a worthwhile and much-appreciated lesson.

Reflection #3

I really enjoyed today’s lecture on consumerism and the cold war. I liked how professor Hass kept stressing the idea of “buying stuff.” It seems that since the consumerism era of the 1950’s, American’s have been obsessed with having a mass collection of junk. We are constantly encouraged to buy things we do not need, and still manage to feel a sense of patriotism every time we reach into our pockets.
Unfortunately, with today’s economic crisis, we have lost this sense of spending. We have begun to question our real need for the items we purchase. We have not however lost this 1950’s ideal of “keeping up with the Jones’s.” This American ideology I find most fascinating. In connection with our lecture on shame and my last reflection, American’s will go as far as possible to maintain an image of a spender. Although they may be in debt, American’s refuse to let their neighbors and friends see that they have lost the ability to spend.
I personally believe this can be explained in 2 ways. 1 reason is the same we previously discussed. We as Americans are too proud to admit that we failed, and our sense of shame causes us to hide our financial difficulties. My second reason, is that the ideal American is one with a credit card and cash in hand. We think of malls, and Walmarts and Costcos where Americans are accumulating large quantities of junk they don’t need. Though some call it disgusting, and others extreme, most of us call it American and for that reason we have no choice but to continue spending in order to maintain our “American” identity.

Reflection #2

I thought that this weeks readings were all great in shedding light on events that have happened in the US's history, even those events that don't always seem to get recognized.

The biggest example of this was the Okihiro article about the Japanese-American interment camps. I find it very interesting that a majority of them still wanted to show that they were American by erecting fences and carrying on with American traditions such as 4th of July parades. It was also interesting that the US government went into the camps and asked for recruits for the military. If I was in that situation I don't think I would be too willing to serve in a capacity, such as the military, for a country that had just uprooted my family, and placed me in a barbwire enclosure or in a "renovated" horse stable with no privacy. It just seems absurd.

Ernie's correspondents, I found to be also interesting on how he had illustrated the war for the people back at home. Though hes accounts were watered down and definitely not really geared toward telling the people at home exactly what was happening in the war itself, but more of like here's a story about how your son is doing and some of the things that he sees. Stories to try and keep morale up about the war, and I feel this is the reason why he came to hate the soldiers and the war itself. He didn't hate the soldiers themselves but just the idea and the situation that they had to do and go thru.

Reflection 3

Thinking about WWII as Ernie's War and a unifying period in American history, I found Professor Hass's comment in discussion to be a novel perspective. She said that her grandparents of Italian and Irish descent were married and it was considered a "mixed" marriage and their children were considered "mixed".  I have rarely considered the racial hierarchy/tension between Italian immigrants and Irish immigrants mostly because this would never be seen as a problem today. However, in studying the culture before and during the war, I believe this story holds great value in understanding the war as a unifying force. WWII was in a sense an americanization process, bringing ethnicities together on the common ground of patriotism. Also, with a strong understanding of an enemy, it was fertile soil for American breeding. 

I also consider the perspective of the immigrants- much like discussion question 2 from Ernie's War. Although I recognize that there was (probably) some tension between loyalty given to ancestral countries and America, there may have also been a strong desire to assimilate to American culture. This is a different view that we usually discuss. We often talk about America's desire to assimilate 'newcomers' but I would assume that families immigrating to America would also have a desire to assimilate to their new country. Maybe this is something that most people have already considered already, but I found it an interesting, new point of view brought on by Professor Hass's contribution to our discussion yesterday. 

Handout Questions for Class on 3/12

Ernie's War

1. Do you think that our perception of future wars would have changed if they had been reported in the same way that Pyle reported WWII (as opposed to newscasters and video footage)? How so?

2. Given European Americans’ background how do you think that they felt having to fight in Europe, some in their home countries. How about German Americans? Do you think that there was any immigrant population in the United States that did not feel conflicted?

3. Pyle uses this knowledge of what is important to his readers to pick his topics and to more intimately connect the readers to the individual soldiers, rather than just the abstract concepts that they represent. Where do you see evidence of this in his writing and how is it effective? How does he bring out a sense of patriotism and duty in his readers through his writing?

4. What do you think that this added complexity means in the context of America’s thoughts at the time about the war? Does it reflect a tension that the soldiers and citizens at home felt too?

An American Story

1. Considering that Americans were fighting to liberate concentration camps in Europe, how did they not see the hypocrisy in sending their own citizens to internment camps based on ethnic differences?

2. How did the media use its influence to misinform Americans about the experience of Japanese-Americans in internment camps? How much is the media driven by government motives?

3. Given that FDR was already thinking about internment camps as early as 1936, do you think that they would have happened eventually? Was Pearl Harbor just an excuse for a previous agenda?

4. The many groups oppressed by white Americans throughout our history have responded in different ways to their persecution. As we saw in Killing Custer, the Native Americans chose to fight back against the government. However, many of the Japanese-Americans taken to internment camps seemed to take their situation in stride and make the best of it using humor and beautification. Why do you think they chose this reaction? Was it more effective than resistance?

The Riddle of the Zoot

1. Do you think that Malcolm would have developed this ideals anyway, had his youth not been spent in an urban, hipster environment?

2. Given the similar racial messages and cultural experiences that tied both youth populations to the suits that they wore, why do you think that in general many Mexican Americans men enlisted in WWII, while most African American men avoided it?

3. How are the balances of power reflected in the zoot suit, both from the “white” perspective and from the standpoint of the African and Mexican Americans wearing the zoot suit?

4. How does this resistance fit into the era of the citizen soldier and how do you think that it helped or hurt Black “progress” on racial hierarchy? What do you think these Black readers felt towards Pyle’s columns?

The Great Depression and Today

I found that our current economic times give more meaning to how the Great Depression may have felt. The media describes how many people lose their jobs everyday and how many sectors of our economy have declined. It was interesting to talk about the Great Depression and the shame that people felt in discussion, because we see and may feel those same feelings in our current times. The shame during both times was due to the fact that people could not provide for their families and it is difficult for us to deal with that because we have a culture that believes one should be able to provide for one's family. I also feel that there is a parallel between the Great Depression and now because we tend to feel that as Americans, we should be able to find jobs to secure our necessities. People were shocked at the economics of the Great Depression as people are shocked now because we think that America and its people are supposed to be successful. It troubles us when our ideas of America are not consistent with the realities of our economic situations.

Reflection, Great Depression discussion in Section

I found the discussion about the great depression in section this week very interesting. I had recently been thinking about the similarities between that time in American history and the crisis we are experiencing now, and the effects on average Americans in both situations.
During the Great Depression, more Americans were faced with unemployment, and like we said there was a general sense of "shame" associated with hardship. Today, our crisis stems from derivative securities based off of mortgages, that is the banking system. The situation now is substantially more complex than a simple "run on the banks" as experienced in 29'. Today, with the global interconnectedness of our financial system, an implosion of complex securities has rippled across the globe. For the average American, it is difficult to fully understand the situation that has brought this sever recession about.

There also is a completely different outlook on the situation today. To me, it seems as if there is almost a sense of entitlement for help, rather than shame. Regardless of the cause, a recovery will require Americans to come together and allow the economy to begin to repair itself. That being said, perhaps a bit of a sense of shame wouldn't be bad for us right now. It is also very interesting to hear varying opinions on this crisis, as well as the course we should take to attempt to correct it. While we can only look forward from here, it is my hope that we learned something from this time, and as we proceed forward we will act more cautiously knowing how bad things really can get.

Reflection- photo analyzation

I think analyzing photographs is a very interesting process. I've taken art classes, so I've looked at works of art to analyze their components and speculate about the intentions the artist had in creating the art. In a handmade work of art, things such as line, shape, space, hue, etc. are things the artist does, usually intentionally.
When we were watching the film about Dorothea Lange in lecture, I thought it was very unusual how the photographs were referred to as 'made'. Before looking at Lange's photographs, I considered photography to be a simple snapshot of whatever is in front of the camera. The way Lange is depicted as an artist implies that her photographs were manipulated to look the way she wanted them to. This is possible, considering that a photographer chooses the angle to shoot from and can manipulate things in the area of interest to make them look a certain way.
However, there are things a photographer cannot control in a photograph, and some objects in the picture seem to have a deeper meaning, as if the image was destined to be captured in that certain moment to purposely convey a point of view or a story to the viewer.

Reflection #2

I find the most compelling aspect of Dorothea Lange's photography to be her sympathy. At a time of rising emphasis on individualism and  progress, Lange admirably highlights those captured by poverty and crushed by industrialization. As the clip we watched in class pointed out, Lange photographed the people that society had kicked out. She gave an account of the people that didn't (or couldn't) keep up with the developing decade. However, instead of blaming the individual, she empathized with their sufferings and published their pain. Lange offered a different interpretation of the social order in the United States. She rejected racial hierarchy and presented the grief of all races, rejecting the idea of white supremacy. Lange liberated the idea of individualism: she captured failures, not successes and showed pain instead of joy. She exposed the consequences of an independent lifestyle and showed (in great detail) the nation’s need for justice and civil rights.

At a time of unacknowledged depression, Lange photographed the world honestly. I think it’s admirable and selfless and entirely commendable that she dedicated many years of her life to fighting for the people who couldn’t fight for themselves. 

Reflection #3

Today in discussion we did the photo activity where we analyzed two pictures and tried to interpret what the image conveyed. I found this very interesting because I have never analyzed a photo before. Some of the ideas that we came up with as a class never occurred to me, and made me realize that there is a lot more to photography than I thought. I remember someone saying that the worker in one of the photos was the focus of the picture, and represented a bigger idea because his identity was hidden. I would have never looked at it in this way and initially just saw a guy working. Some of the other ideas that were mentioned included the symmetry of the picture representing the order of the time, the tool the worker was holding representing the industrial period, and the photo as a whole representing a since of patriotism because of the mens efforts in the war. All these ideas really opened my eyes to how much a picture can really tell you.
This week we also talked a lot about Dorothea Lange and her methods as a photographer. She tried to capture the actions of her subjects to convey her message. I also found it interesting how her initial photo was only taken so that her subjects would be comfortable, and then she tried to get more candid photos. I find her pictures interesting and after today’s discussion I see her photos in a whole new way. I think she did a great job in showing the poverty conditions during the Great Depression and I believe that her message got across to her viewers. I thought that this week’s discussion was very helpful and I will use what I learned in my paper.

I found today's discussion about the Great Depression to be pretty interesting, especially our discussion about the parallelism between the Great Depression and the economy of today's time. A couple of students mentioned in class that people today aren't even letting their family members know about their situations (after losing everything). I wonder if this is due to the shame of being seen as failures or if it's the fact that they do not wish to burden their families. In the past, it seems that they were ashamed because they saw themselves as failures for the inability to provide for their family. It is interesting that America's initial reactions were to blame someone, anyone, for what has happened. People were quick to point their fingers; yet it seems that in the end everyone just blamed themselves for their situation. Was this because they didn't know who to blame? Or did they really believe it was their own faults for their poverty? I think it has to do with a little bit of both. Because there were so many factors that played into the Great Depression, it was hard to pinpoint one specific cause; therefore, people took the burden upon themselves and faulted their own shortcomings. I also think that it is dangerous to fall into this self-blame mindset. In order for a nation to rise out of something like an economic crisis, we must all think and work collectively to make any real changes that can improve something as huge as this.

SECOND REFLCTION POST

as far as the second month of this class has been going, i still am really enjoying it. i would like to thank everyone in my section for being so good about participating. i have been in sections before where that was not the case. i have really enjoyed getting to discuss all of these issue with you guys and the discussion has really helped me to better understand the issue. Also, i think all of the presenters have been doing a really good job, and i have left each section feeling like i had a better understanding of the material. i dont know about any of you but i am really looking forward to the last part of this course. i am a huge history buff and we are getting into my favorite part of american history WWII. i think that this section will be particularly interesting given the correlation it has with current events.
I musta admit i did struggle with early 1900's a bit as we were discussing them in class. i understood everything pretty well, just not as intuitively as some of the other material. i think that this has a lot to do with the fact that this material was less intersting to me. I must admit that if WWII is my favorite part of american history, the early part of the twentieth centrury is my least favorite, and it is often easier to learn/understand material that has an interst to you.
see you all in discussion!

Amos and Andy

I too did not find this video surprising. As a matter of fact, it is something I expected from entertainment of that time. It is very similar to the minstrel shows of that time in a sense that they both make fun of African Americans in a way that is meant for excitement and laughter. The difference between the minstrel shows and this type of cartoon is that the cartoons served the purpose of showing people in America how NOT to act. The sad part is that it is done at the expense of another group.
It is difficult to decipher whether or not African Americans actually spoke, acted, and thought the way that is portrayed in Amos and Andy (as well as other depictions). I feel that the depictions are exaggerated, but there is also some truth to them. African Americans at the time were not always able to receive good education, and many of them were just adapting to the American way of life, so it is very well possible for them to have spoken as such, and not been as intelligent. There is a problem with the way the show portrays African Americans because it goes over the top and makes it seem as if all African Americans acted in that way.
The American society went out of their way to make sure all other groups were integrated into the American way of living, but it seems as though they went out of their way to keep African Americans away from the American way of living. There were no steps take to show the group that the images shown in Amos ad Andy were not how THEY should be.

Amos and Andy

I did not find the clip very shocking, when the time period in which it was produced is taken into consideration. The film was made by white people for white people, during a time when eventhough African American's were free they did not have equal rights and were still constantly looked down upon by white Americans. I feel that the clip became so popular because the white people of this time looked for ways to justify their feeling of superiority and this clip did so through humiliation of the African American race and portraying them as being unintelligent, and rowdy. This is similar to how the White American's portrayed the Indians as being "savages" in the late 1800's. The clip exemplifies what was talked about in lecture about analyzing cartoons. The characters in the cartoon, although supposed to be African American's some what resemble clowns, which makes one think that white American's did not take African American's of this time seriously. The characters actions also give insight to how the white American viewed the African American of this time unintelligent, vulgar, and comical.

Lecture on the Great Depression

From the end of the Lange Film in lecture today, I feel that a lot of Dorthea Lange's power comes from the way that she felt when she took the pictures. In the interview segments with her assistant, it was expressed that she felt a lot of anxiety about taking these pictures and and the ideas that they were capturing. She "didn't like the erosion of Civil Rights" that these pictures represented for the Japanese internment camps and was "scared that she would not get the [Great Depression] pictures right". Lange like every other citizen was scared, was anxious, because she knew that there was very little that separated her from the subjects that she was taking pictures of. Her pictures are so powerful because of this point; they not only capture the shame and confusion of the subjects, but transmit the anxiety that Lange is feeling herself, that the rest of the country is feeling in that moment.

Discussion questions and photos for 3/5/09

1. How would you account for the popularity of Amos and Andy in the 1920s?
2. Why do you think settlement houses went out of use after WWII?
3. Why didn’t the government bother to Americanize African Americans?
4. Why do you think people felt so ashamed of their own poverty?
5. Do you see any of the same situations today as during the era of the Great Depression?
6. Why do you think Dorothea Lange kept finding herself at odds with her employer?
7. How could the formal properties of a photograph (color, line, shape, etc) contribute to its communication of “a specific point of view?”
8. What did Dixon’s photo manipulations reveal about the cultural climate he lived in? What do contemporary photo manipulation practices reveal about our culture today?

"Man working on hull of U.S. submarine at Electric Boat Co., Groton, Conn."
Lt. Comdr. Charles Fenno Jacobs, August 1943.
Link: http://www.archives.gov/research/ww2/photos/images/ww2-24.jpg

Photographed in 1926 in Chicago, IL
title and author unknown
Link: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://pro.corbis.com/images/VV1505.jpg%3Fsize%3D67%26uid%3D%257B669CFB9B-51D0-456D-BB6B-D88BE517448C%257D&imgrefurl=http://pro.corbis.com/search/Enlargement.aspx%3FCID%3Disg%26mediauid%3D%257B669CFB9B-51D0-456D-BB6B-D88BE517448C%257D&usg=__nL_NMoLuhH3TsX5qwnML0XLgerQ=&h=480&w=335&sz=50&hl=en&start=16&tbnid=6534CMmScXeqYM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=90&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dflappers%2Bdoing%2Bthe%2Bcharleston%2B1920s%26hl%3Den%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26sa%3DG

Amos 'n' Andy

At first glance, this looks like a classic cartoon that may be viewed as merely a harmless comical program. Taking a closer look though, it is easy to identify the subtle hints of black stereotypes and it is easy to see the racism incorporated in the cartoon. Throughout the cartoon, the black characters act clumsy and slow. This is especially apparent in the scene with the car where the larger black character falls over himself and apparently can’t “watch everything at one time?”. This seems to paint the African Americans as being dimwitted and not capable to handling even the most basic tasks, which could be how many white Americans felt about African Americans at this time.

Also, during the boxing match, there are two instances where the black competitors are referred to as animals. The first reference is a horse and the second one seemed to be a stag. This may illustrate the underlying feeling that African Americans are unsophisticated and are even animal like in their behavior. White Americans may have this same feeling and treat African Americans as a lesser class.

sorry for the 3 repeats

Reflection #2

I was fascinated by today’s lecture about the importance of photography. Although I found the documentary a bit dry and difficult to take notes on, I found the commentary to be quite insightful. It really put the expression “a picture is worth a thousand words” into perspective. Seeing those photos of the dust bowl I thought were the most interesting, since The Grapes of Wrath is one of my favorite novels. Steinbeck along with Lange truthfully bring out the honesty and harsh reality associated with American poverty.
I would relate Lange and her work to Annie Leibovitz. During Christmas break I saw Leibovitz’s exhibit in London, and there was a short 30 minute documentary about how she captured American culture through photographs in the 1960’s and 70’s. Her Vogue and Rolllingstones covers exemplify the simplicity and rawness of famous celebrities, just as Lange’s work brought the candidness of rural America to the forefront.
I think that many people take photographers for granted. They assume that its nothing more than a quick click of a button, deserving of little artistic praise. To the contrary, photographers like Lange are artists because their work not only captures a moment in time, but has the power to evoke change or in the words of Lange “every human action has consequences.”

Reflection #2

I was fascinated by today’s lecture about the importance of photography. Although I found the documentary a bit dry and difficult to take notes on, I found the commentary to be quite insightful. It really put the expression “a picture is worth a thousand words” into perspective. Seeing those photos of the dust bowl I thought were the most interesting, since The Grapes of Wrath is one of my favorite novels. Steinbeck along with Lange truthfully bring out the honesty and harsh reality associated with American poverty.
I would relate Lange and her work to Annie Leibovitz. During Christmas break I saw Leibovitz’s exhibit in London, and there was a short 30 minute documentary about how she captured American culture through photographs in the 1960’s and 70’s. Her Vogue and Rolllingstones covers exemplify the simplicity and rawness of famous celebrities, just as Lange’s work brought the candidness of rural America to the forefront.
I think that many people take photographers for granted. They assume that its nothing more than a quick click of a button, deserving of little artistic praise. To the contrary, photographers like Lange are artists because their work not only captures a moment in time, but has the power to evoke change or in the words of Lange “every human action has consequences.”

Reflection #2

I was fascinated by today’s lecture about the importance of photography. Although I found the documentary a bit dry and difficult to take notes on, I found the commentary to be quite insightful. It really put the expression “a picture is worth a thousand words” into perspective. Seeing those photos of the dust bowl I thought were the most interesting, since The Grapes of Wrath is one of my favorite novels. Steinbeck along with Lange truthfully bring out the honesty and harsh reality associated with American poverty.
I would relate Lange and her work to Annie Leibovitz. During Christmas break I saw Leibovitz’s exhibit in London, and there was a short 30 minute documentary about how she captured American culture through photographs in the 1960’s and 70’s. Her Vogue and Rolllingstones covers exemplify the simplicity and rawness of famous celebrities, just as Lange’s work brought the candidness of rural America to the forefront.
I think that many people take photographers for granted. They assume that its nothing more than a quick click of a button, deserving of little artistic praise. To the contrary, photographers like Lange are artists because their work not only captures a moment in time, but has the power to evoke change or in the words of Lange “every human action has consequences.”

Amos 'n' Andy

I believe this comic shows a transition from obvious bigotry to passive and unspoken prejudice. This skit highlights certain characteristics of the black men: offensive unruliness and primitive rowdiness. It implies a strong degree of vulgarity in the black men. However, the transition from blatant racism to passive prejudice occurs because the skit portrays these characters and their (obvious) temperaments with humor. By presenting these biases with an undertone of comedy, the authors give the audience an opportunity to laugh at the seriousness of racial tensions. As the audience accepts the humor in racial stereotypes, the subject becomes less severe. Racism presented through comedy reenforces the racial characterizations but lessens the frankness of the message. 

Amos and Andy Reflection

I absolutely agree with what everyone said. This cartoon video clip epitomizes the exaggerated stereotypes created by the white man in order to strengthen the color line. These African American men were portrayed as uneducated, animalistic and as more of a source of entertainment than human beings. I too am unsurprised by the "dumb" dialect of the characters. It exemplifies the racial hierarchy created in this country. Unfortunately, if I had only listened to this clip and did not watch it, I could have guessed the race of the characters. This thus proves the prevalence of color line. Since the clip was created in 1934 I must assume that there is a connection to the end of the Great Depression and the beginning of World War II. I'm assuming that white men who lost their jobs were fearful of professional competition, and therefore created such stereotypes to keep the black race out of the running for good jobs.

Amos and Andy Reflection

Although this cartoon is comical, underpinning racism towards African Americans is prevalent throughout this short clip.  A few things I noticed about the characters:  all of the characters throughout the entire cartoon are black and there are also no women.  This perhaps reflects segregationist views of the time (e.g. separate but equal, Jim Crow Laws, etc.) and enforces male hegemonic gender roles with the absence of women.  The characters speak very poorly, have exaggerated lips, and appear uneducated, which reflects racial stereotypes of this time period.  Another point to note is that the two creators of Amos and Andy were two white men, who each took on the roles of the various characters in the show.  This is very similar to minstrel shows in which white men dressed up and played African Americans.  The music is very similar to minstrel music as well (upbeat, jazzy tunes).

Another thing I noted is that there are many allusions to animals and how the characters are treated and/or act like animals.  At the wrestling match they tell Andy that they have the horseshoe of flowers that they intend to put around his neck.  Andy responds with a comment inferring that he feels like he is going to be crowned like a horse at the racetrack.  Andy's wrestling opponent is portrayed with animalistic qualities: he seems to snort like a pig and he appears to change into a moose (in Andy's imagination).   

The radio station that the show originally aired on was in Chicago.  I am curious if such a show would have been popular if it had originated in the south--- would the show appear more racist to reflect southern viewpoints? or --- would there have been more rebellion from African Amercians?  Also, since the show was type casted as a situation comedy, did that make all of the racial slurs more appropriate? (e.g.  the show was a comedy and therefore the racism in the show was supposed to be silly and harmless rather than hurtful and racist)  If the show had not been a comedy would it have seen more backlash from the general public, particularly African Americans.  Just some thoughts to think about!

Amos and Andy

At first glace this video appears to be a cartoon created simply for entertainment and amusement. However, upon further scrutiny it becomes obvious the producers had a different agenda. The depiction of the African American characters in the cartoon clearly shows the sentiment of white Americans toward minorities, especially black Americans, during the time period. The exaggerated features of the characters including their very dark skin tones, big lips, and big eyes relate to the practices of blackface and the minstrels. These are all features that white Americans used to stereotype blacks, and this cartoon only helps to enforce these views. The behavior exhibited by the characters is another way the producers mock and stereotype African Americans. Rather than behaving like people, the characters are more comparable to animals, acting aggressively and primitively. Their slow movements and dialect are also used to portray African Americans as unintelligent and ridiculous. The entire video uses these silly stereotypical black figures to further impose the racial divides of the time period. The creators most likely wanted white Americans to continue viewing black Americans as animal-like and “different” to keep the color line in tact.