Mara’s Blog

I really enjoyed this week’s panels. There were so many themes we talked about this semester. The individuals on this panel were able to explore them in even greater detail and share their findings with us.

Godzilla: a symbol of so many things. He’s the cause of so much destruction in Japan but he’ can also be seen as a protector and ally, whatever he might be–godzilla is Japan’s very own monster. Something we got to in class was the humanlike characteristics of this monster and how within the original film, an actual man is inside the costume. While he causes so much destruction, at the same time we empathize with him. This idea reminds me of King Kong. This giant monkey is out of place in new york city, but as an audience sitting and observing him for two hours we really form a connection with him.

Wii would like to play: I wish I had a wii…it was a risk on nintendo’s part but it was a pretty ingenious idea. i mean, who doesn’t want to be able to bowl, race, or rock out all in the comfort of their own living room. I found the presentation interesting, in that it delved into the world of video games that I wasn’t too familiar with. This game world has different groups of people, its own marketing tactics and its own unique culture. The wii is a revolution because its targeting to everyone. I think well have to wait a few years to see its influence on people and society, perhaps families. Also there’s a line which comes out of this topic is “guitar hero/ rock band.” This game has introduced so many young people to rock music from across the generations. Kyle said the wii made people who never touched a video game before into players. I feel like guitar hero is doing this and is also instilling in the younger generation an appreciation for music. No, in this game players aren’t actually playing  an actual guitar but their being exposed to and learning about music which they might not have been if they hadn’t played the game. I wonder what effects this game will have on our generation and the evolution of music.

Superheroes: Yeah, a large percent of them are white. Creators started to realize this and change it up a bit, but it sort of backfired, when the more  diverse superheroes introduced were evoking ethnic and racial stereotypes. Somebody brought up the fact that there is no black disney princess–which i never fully realized before!! apparently they are in the process of making one…i wonder how that will go. Anyways, so many issues in society and in our world can be brought back to ethnicity. We were just talking in sociology today about how ethnic linkages have been the primary source of conflict for years, and its something that will continue into the future. I think a seminar in race and the perception of race and how it develops (in comics and cartoons,etc. ) would be cool.

Thats all I got. I just want to say thanks to Dr. Fernsebner and everybody for an awesome semester. This class is definately something I will look back on years from now:)

Wow! This weeks presentations were very interesting. Each one really drew me in…

The presentation on Barney was cool, especially since threads of my own topic overlapped with Lauren’s. This project delved into this children’s cultural icon and the various effects he has had on a generation of children. Whether you loved Barney (had the pillow case or stuffed animal or whatever) or hated him (as seen through that video) this character I think has influenced us all in some way. Like Lauren said Barney and his creators wanted to teach kids positive values and give them their own “world” where they could hang out, learn and play. There could be various explanations behind the Barney multilation. In my research I found the motivations for Barbie-torture activites to be psychological, social, and developmental.

I really enjoyed Rachel’s presentation even though I’m not too too familiar with the Muppets and their famous show. The project really examined the different aspects of the show and its characters and proved that the Muppets as a whole really have profound meaning. Points I found to be of interest were: Miss Piggy as a diva, “Its not easy being green” and race (i didn’t know!) and how the puppets are being used to mediate conflicts overseas. This project made me want to go and watch a Muppet movie or show:)

I love Toy Story. When my brother was little and wasn’t in school yet, he would watch Toy Story everyday with my mom. Disney has the ability to produce films which can appeal to a wide range of audiences from different age and gender groups. As a kid I liked Toy Story and the whole idea of toys coming to life was so appealing to me and now when I watch the movie its the same enjoyable experience, but now there’s so many jokes that I never caught before!!! Something which I thought was neat was how you really don’t hear of too many critics of the movie. We discussed some reasons in class but I also.. Toy Story was the first full-length computer-animated film. This was really a breakthrough for cinema and paved the way for future films. 

I am so going to see #3.

I found Kevin’s presentation on the soccer ball to be really interesting. I played soccer from a very young age and though I’ve moved on to play other sports, soccer will always have a place in my heart. I thought it was cool how he made the ball a symbol for so many different things, such as unity, ethnicity, force, the world, and “youth” so to speak. Symbolism is something we’ve been talking about all semester with regard to toys, whether it was godzilla (lots of symbols there) or pokemon. He also talked about the ways in which children play the game, and how that play transcend rules, positions, or any real structure. When little kids play soccer there arent really positions. There’s usually a big mass of kids just all chasing the ball. (its actually kind of funny to watch:) ) Besides that play itself can be a form of imagination. This is also a constant theme we’ve seen through this course. We’ve talked or touched on this idea of play and why its usually related to children, as opposed to adults. I think its generally accepted that kids tend to participate in imaginative play, whereas older people lose that aspect. Why is that? I wrote about this in my own research paper. I guess play for children is in itself a form of “socialization”. It introduces kids to the real world and gives them practice for it. It also teaches them about social norms, values, adult and gender roles. The best example of this is when you play house or grocery store. Adults are already in that “realm” which kids imagine.

Most imaginery play however is grounded in a fantasy world. Toy history itself has taken a shift from functional toys to fantasy and character-based toys. This relates to the peter pan theme, where it is the goal to be perpetually young. There’s something about youth that makes us more free, whether its because were not tied down with responsibities or maybe just because were “allowed” to imagine and dream.

Good luck to everyone presenting in the next couple of classes!!!! You’re almost there!!!

I found the article “My Favorite things” to be particularly interesting. It was funny to see which possessions appealed to particular genders and cultures. Something in the paper/argument which really stood out to me was “integration vs. differientation” are our shared favorite possessions shared by a number of individuals or are our favorite things unique to us in some way? There are so many mass-produced goods being promoted out there, the author gives us the example of Pepsi and Chevi, and yet we also want our goods to be a form of self-expression and a representation of ourselves– whether it be a reminder of a past experience or a gift from a loved one. Interesting… Also I found lots to compare between this article and the one about the American dream and materialism. While the article “selling out the american dream” sort of criticizes american consumerism and the collection of “stuff”, “my favorite things” has a more positive approach, i think. Possessions are expressions of our identity. For very young children they serve as security blankets which allow them to ease into the real world. Objects have the ability to take on profound meaning, especially during catasrophes or situations like institutionalization. For the elderly, wallendorf notes, objects carry meaning for nursing home residents. As we talked about over this semester toys can sometimes substitute for human interaction and can even serve as virtual pets. There is a lot of stuff out there but behind the plastic there is something deeper.

I think our group picked out a lot of good articles and sources. I think each one can serve as a significant clue for a historical/ social analysis. Lauren’s Barney video was um disturbing. Even though that was just a stuffed animal–an inanimate object– being destroyed, theres a certain character embodied within the toy. I think thats why the class generally agreed that it was unsettling to watch (at least for the first time) Even though Barney is a dinosaur he has human like qualities, which allowed kids to relate to him. I watched Barney as a little kid and I had a stuffed animal similar to the one that was tortured/killed, and though I dont distinctly remember how I interacted with the show or played with the stuffed Barney, i remember those being good times… I think barney was a pretty wholesome character for children, especially compared to telitubbies which are just creepy.

My project is definately in the realm of psychology and the social sciences. What I am basically writing about is the link between toys (Barbies, Bratz and action figures) and body image. I found a lot of secondary sources, some of which are actual research, such as experiments. Theres so many ways to look at the subject that i’ve been having difficult creating a thesis that goes beyond all the research, like we talked about in class.

To add this “meaning” to my paper Im going to tie the disfiguration of Barbie dolls, seen for both boys and girls. In my paper im going to argue that these types of behaviors represent that children have their own identites, they are not just shaped by everything around them. They don’t all internalize the ideal body images which toys evoke. My main arguments will be 1) Over the past few decades fashion dolls and action figures reflect an image which is largely unattainable and in some cases unhealthy for an average person. 2) Toys can effect childrens perception of body image, as seen through research by psychologists and scientists 3) There are several factors which cause an individual to have a negative body image. There is not enough evidence to suggust that there is a direct relationship between toys and body image disorders. 4) Children rebel against these cultural messages being sent through toys. The destruction/ disfiguration of Barbie dolls has a culture of its own and shows that children are not strictily molded by external forces.

My whole paper is going to lead up to that last point. I have lots of evidence for #4. So many girls get to a point/age where they feel like cutting barbie’s long locks off. Many middle school boys reported burning barbie dolls, mohawking them etc. There’s some youtube videos of this kind of disfiguring. This kind of activity which is not uncommon demonstrates that kids have their own thoughts and identities and they have a say in the development of their own self-concept and body image.

Did anyone disfigure their barbie dolls or action figures??

I found Allison’s second chapter on Pokemon to be a little more interesting than the first. Maybe its because she brings up some of the more interesting/juicy topics, like youth violence, or maybe its because she makes some good connections to Disney, for example. Several points stood out to me. The first is her discussion of the catchy slogan “Gotta Catch ‘Em All!” I thought it was really interesting when she was talking about the FCC and how that prohibit certain injunctions in children’s television. Pokemon’s slogan was brilliant because it followed these rules but it was also a perfect way to pokemonize children. On p 244 she says it, “rehearses the logic of pokemon play: and also helped to spurr the “campaign and popularity of pokemon.” I decided to google some other famous/catchy adverstising slogans. Some are: “Be all that you can be” by army, “I want my MTV” by MTV, and “Obey your thirst” by Sprite. What the pokemon one and all of these have in common is they are short, easy to remember and say, and the message is clear.

Another point in Allison text which really stood out to me was the discussion of Pikachu as the center of the pokemon “craze” and an archtype for fantasy characters. Ash in the show was meant to be the main character, but pikachu definately dominated the stage. When I think back to watching the cartoons on saturday morning tv, i remember not being all that crazy about ash. It wasn’t that I couldnt relate because he was a guy and im a girl, but pikachiu and the other pokemon just seemed so much cooler. They were both powerful and cute (pikachu at least) He was new and different.

I found the Disney connection to be intersting as well. Pokemon was a break-through because it was breaking Disney’s rules and it was also a different form of imagination for kids. For Disney and other American fantasy kids could watch their favorite characters on screen or buy (acquire) the paraphanalia to go along with it– but with pokemon you could really “insert” yourself into that world. The kid was empowered because they could collect pokemon and really partake in the fantasy. I think most kids played the game or collected cards before the cartoon, so it shows how kids were active participants,not just “passive bystanders” as Allison says.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Advertising_slogans

Reading Anne Allison’s Chapter on “Fierce Flesh” has got me thinking…Sailor Moon according to Allison was able to tranform into a superstar while also keeping “one foot in the everyday.” (p. 135) She calls it “the template for female idols in the 1990s.” This quote really struck my attention because this theme of transformation has strongly appealed to myself and other American girls over the past few decades. Think about it- all or a majority of successful entertainment films or shows for primarily girls in recent decades are about an average girl becoming a “superstar.” Look at Hannah Montana a show which has had an incredible amount of success. What started out as a Disney channel sitcom, has generated a multi-million dollar business, a global tour, an extensive and profitable product line, and a massive fan base. Hannah Montana is a rock star who is also an average teeager named Miley Stewart (or Cyrus) She essentially gets the “best of both worlds.” Look at Disney’s film The Princess Diaries. The film is based off of Meg Cabot bookseries which tell the story of Mia Thermopolis, a normal teen who realizes that she is the heir to the throne of a small foreign country. Over time Mia transforms from this clumsy and awkward teen to an elegant and self-assured princess. This template for female idols which Anne Allison brings up goes beyond the 90s and has become a major theme in recent works of entertainment. Whats the appeal of transformation? I think every girl imagines herself or likes to imagine herself as a “superstar”, someone who is able to break out of everyday life for a change and be spectacular. I think we like the idea of improving ourselves while also realizing out dreams/ aspirations. Thats exactly what Mia Thermopolis does in Princess Diaries and thats a theme which most female audiences are charmed and enchanted by.

This theme of transformation sort of relates to the “Cinderella” or “rags to riches” story, which we see so often in literature and entertainment across generations. In both, the main character is able to improve her situation. I think the main difference is that the “transformation” motif has a grounding in reality. For Sailor Moon, the girls are superheroes but they are also students and your average/everyday girls. Hannah Montana is a rockstar but she has school, friends and family to worry about.

This is a theme that transcends gender though. Today in class the topic of (marvel) superheroes came up. Heroes like superman and spiderman are the same way. They also have a foot in both worlds. Spiderman is great and all but he’s also a real person and a just a nerdy guy underneath. Superman needs Clark Kent to go with his heroic self. Its interesting how toys and entertainment can be separated into distinct male and female categories, and yet themes like this are universally appealing.:)

These past to Chapters: “Mighty Morphin Power Rangers” and “Fierce Flesh” have stood out to me because I am noticing a lot of themes in toy and entertainment industries in the 1990s which are recurring today. It is interesting that allsion presents us with the Power rangers, a successful team of fighters, and a culture which heavily influenced children and the  toy industry in American. Then she presents Sailor Moon, a show about 5 average teenage girls who lead double lives as fashionable and fierce fighters. (sorry about the alliteration) While both of these shows are Japanese in origin, Power Rangers was very successful as a series and a toy commody in the U.S.—Sailor Moon on the other hand was not so much… So what accounts for this difference?  What are the characteristics that separate a popular toy or series (a hot commodity) from a not so popular toy or series? Allison makes several key points but I also want to bring in my own. First in Allison’s discussion she makes it clear that the “American” version of Go Renga was simply “Americanized.” The team became more diverse in terms of race and gender. Another girl was added to the group. The setting was California rather than Tokyo, Japan. Tho only parts of the show which remained “Japanese” were the action shots, in which all characters were costumed and masked. American kids had no notion that their favorite show was originally Japanese. In class tuesday us “’90s kids” pretty much established this. The makers of the show really extracted any signs of Japan, in order to make the show more identifable for American kids.(glocalization) Another quality which Allison brings up is diversification, which is launching toys, clothings and other “stuff” which goes along with the story. The key feature in which I think made Power Rangers the succuss that it was identity. Kids were able to relate themselves to these 6 teens. It wasn’t just that they were normal kids but they were normal kids and “cool” rangers who could morph and evil forces. They were really admired.

Now for Sailor Moon. I had heard of the show/ books when I was younger but I wasn’t really “into” it. Sailor Moon had a lot of the same elements of Power Rangers– a team of teenagers, a theme of transformation, and a “double life. ” Sailor Moon according to Allison was able to tranform into a superstar while also keeping “one foot in the everyday.” (p. 135) The main reason that Sailor Moon were not as successful was because was a risk. The show kept its Japanese components, except for language, which was most likely translated to English. It wasn’t heavily Americanized like Pwr. Rangers. Also, no one before had really attempted to create a series about a team of girls who were “ultra-cute” and “fierce”. These are two elements that aren’t usually put together. According to Allison, It was breaking the “mold” of standard TV action shows because “characters could fight and look pretty at the same time.”(p. 128) Just typing that quote, the cartoon Powder-Puff girls popped into my head. Thats an example of a pretty successful series about “pretty soldiers.” Though this show was created and produced in America, it reminds me of japanese toy culture in that the main characters fufill that same “cuteness” that has sold well in Japan (and US) in characters such as Hello-Kitty and Pikachu.

During Chapter 3 of Allison’s Millineal Monster’s she delves into the sociological and behavioral aspects of Japanese culture. This seems like it would be a tangent from the subject of toys, but we talked in class on Thursday about how toys (and video games) and culture are so tightly intertwined in Japanese society, that you have to analyze them together. Allison even mentions on page 86 that,” the world of personal electronics designer fashions, and “character cuteness”: a plethora of things, machines and fantasies” are “closely affixed to people’s bodies and interwoven into the fabric of their everyday lives.” What i found particularly interesting was her discussion of “intimate alienation”, a term which she references a 1999 article by James A. Fujii. Intimate alienation is when you are doing something alone and disconnected from others but simultaneously you are in a place that is “shared” by others. This concept could occur when you’re cruising facebook, plugged into your ipod, riding a crowded subway, and it doesn’t matter if your in Japan or the United States. I think there’s lots of reasons we partake in these activities, As allison mentions is eases the loniless or the boredom of an everyday activity, such as a long train ride. Usually there’s social pressure to buy a certain product or sign up for facebook simply because “everyone” else is doing it. An interesting question which Allison poses on page 85 is are these activities/behaviors more intimate or more alienating ? which of the two dominates?

Allison also brings Karl Marx. One would wonder where Marx would come into the subject of Millineal Monsters, but she is able to relate “Intimate Alienation” of Post War Japan to the alienation of the worker proletariat class. According to Marx the burdens which are placed on the worker class causes an extraction of “Life” from the laborers. Buying into electronics and various other material goods is a way to make up for that loss. On page 86 Allison relates this to Japanese society: there is so much pressure for individuals whether it be work demands or academic performance, that it alienates people. Goods become a way to “animate life” and become “the conduits for various forms of communication, intimate relationships.” This goes back to a theme I have written about in my previous blogs– toys replacing or substituting human beings or interpersonal relationships. This animist materialism which Allison brings up is just another explanation for its cause. Maybe it can explain why toys such as tomagotchis and robotic dogs have come out of this country. I think that tying Marx’s work, and therefore drawing in other aspects of sociology, into this really benefits her argument.

In Anne Allison’s introduction she lays out for us the basic themes threading this book together. She mentions three main ones: fantasy, capitalism and globalization. For fantasy Allison touches on characters ranging from Godzilla to Pokemon and their new wave of imagination. What I found really interesting was her discussion of the film Spirited Away. I saw the movie after in was released on video and I have to say it weirded me out. I had never been very familiar with anime or other Japanese toys. (Except for pokemon which everyone knew about in some way, shape or form) I always had a hard time understanding anime culture and its appeal across the world. Allison says that the movie was popular and also critically acclaimed because it was able to mix to different worlds–one of “otherworldly, haunting and intriguing” nature and one of contempory and familiar setting. It then causes a “fascination with something different.” Those words really stood out to me as I was reading because that’s exactly how I percieved Spirited Away. While the strange plot and monsters were so unfamiliar and haunting, I wanted to keep watching out of curiousity and intrigue. Allison made me realize how truly creative this Japanese toy and film culture is. I feel like I can better understand why other Japanese venues, whether it be Pokemon or something else, can attract consumers and fans, and reach countries across the world. When I was thinking about these characteristics of a successful fantasy, which Allison comes up with, it reminded me of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings. The plot, characters, setting is so imaginative and unlike anything within our own world and yet so many people are fascinated by the books and the movies. What Tolkien did was very similar to what Japanese toymakers and writers are doing today. They were both able to create a world so different from our own and yet so intriguing and familiar. Everyone wants to take part in it.

Allison is also into capitalism and globalism and their relation to Japanese toy culture. She poses that the toys come to represent the “very conditons of post-industrial capitalism.” One good example was pokemon. The goal is to gain more and more pokemon in order to further chances of success in battles, just like capitalism runs on “speed, flux and flexibility.” (pg 26) I had never really thought of it this way.