Buckwild- Is This Really America?

On January 3^rd, 2013, MTV introduced Americans to the reality show, “Buckwild”. As if the name of the show, buckwild; disobedient, uncivilized, ‘crazy’, did not describe it enough, the show demonstrates how young individuals live life to the fullest. Each episode follows them throughout their summer vacation in a rural town of West Virginia. The cast members, in eccentric ways, create their own kind of fun with whatever they can find. Quoted from one of the main characters, Shain (Gandee Candy), “We ain’t got much, but we have fun with what we got”. The MTV series also deals with their dating, friendship, and their town. “Buckwild” was ranked as the top-rated series among viewers twelve to thirty-four. It also pulled in an average of three million viewers per episode; therefore, the show was a complete hit.

From muddin’ (driving through mud puddles) to riding mechanical bulls, this show was instantly labeled as a “redneck”, “white trash”, and “hillbilly” series. According to Allison Keene, from Hollywood Reporter, “While the girls of the group act like they're on The Hills: Hillbilly Edition, the boys are constantly engaged in Jackass-type stunts”.  Throughout the series, viewers witnessed dozens of visual elements. One in particular were subtitles. Subtitles are used to help clarify the cast’s slurred words. Shain, the cast member with the thickest southern accent, almost always has subtitles when he is talking. This accentuates either they are uneducated or just simply intoxicated.  MTV also highlights the southern stereotype due to the fact that the cast members have their own vocabulary. Since cast members need to explain to “normal” Americans what words like, “holler”, “daggone” and “muddin”, mean, it illustrates that this series does not follow the typical urban dictionary. The cast members are viewed to be lower class. The men are prime examples for the lower class. Cast members, Tyler and Joey, started a lawn-mowing business because they needed to make money. They ended up quitting before they finished the first lawn. Were Joey and Tyler too lazy to do it or were they uneducated since there is no signs of an authority figure to guide them?

MTV seems to have found a certain trend for their network, stereotyping America. Unfortunately “Buckwild” is not the first reality show that has been stereotyped by MTV. In 2009, viewers tuned into one of the largest controversial reality TV series, “Jersey Shore”. MTV marketed the cast members of “Jersey Show” as ‘guidos/guidettes’. The term guido is described as an Italian-American who tans, wears wild clothing, and parties (a lot). Cast member, Pauly D, quotes, "I was born and raised a guido. It's just a lifestyle. It's being Italian, it's representing, family, tanning, gel, everything”. New Jerseyans were offended by this stereotype. Andrew DiMino, president of UNICCO National (largest Italian community organization in New Jersey), proclaimed: "It's a term used to insult us, implying we are all uneducated people without social graces”. From trending on twitter to turning international, “Jersey Shore” left their viewers with the idea that New Jersey is all tan and no brains. With millions of people saying that “Buckwild” is the new version of  “Jersey Shore”, is MTV stereotyping Americans as foolish party animals?

One of the main cast members, Tyler, displays patriarchy throughout the series. Tyler has the reputation for breaking women’s hearts all over West Virginia. Throughout the show, Tyler is disrespectful to women- from cheating on girlfriends to kissing random women in clubs; Tyler always seems to be in control.  In the beginning of the series, Tyler is seen dating Cara, one of the other cast members, Tyler states, “I like Cara, but I do not want anything but a hook-up. I don’t want to be ‘tied-down’ with just one girl”. By saying this, it shows viewers that in Tyler’s mind it is okay to be with more than one woman at the same time. Soon after viewers hear about Cara, MTV exhibits Tyler’s new interest is Katie, Cara’s good friend. Hook-up after hook-up, while the women (involved with Tyler’s drama) in the show get more emotional, the other men display signs of encouragement for how Tyler is acting. In a patriarchal society, Tyler is exhibiting actions that are deemed not only acceptable, but rather, are encouraged. The same trend can be seen in MTV’s “Jersey Shore”. The male cast members (Pauly D, Vinny, Ronnie, and Mike) have the patriarch in the show. Mike is seen as the leader/father of the cast members. The men support each other’s hook-ups and believe it be ‘normal’ to bring home different women each night. But the men are not okay with the females bringing random men home. For example, in the first season, the men scorn Angela (female cast member) for her encounters with several men.

Let’s think for a second. If you were watching “Buckwild” and you lived in Germany, would you think that all of America is the typical “redneck” lifestyle that the show creates? Stereotyping in some cases could be seen as a good thing, but shows like “Jersey Shore” and “Buckwild” typecast Americans to be wild and uneducated. With both show’s ratings sky rocketing, Americans can only wait for what reality show MTV will come up with next.                

Works Cited

"Italian-Americans hit back at Jersey Shore's use of the word 'guido' | Media | The Observer ." Latest news, world news, sport and comment from the Guardian | theguardian.com | The Guardian .Web. 20 Sept. 2013.

"MTV's 'Buckwild': TV Review - Hollywood Reporter." The Latest Entertainment & Hollywood News - The Hollywood Reporter.Web. 20 Sept. 2013.

The "Black" Quarterback

The National Football League (NFL) has been the most popular professional sporting league in the United States for the past 47 years (NFL Communications Staff, 2013), and it likely will remain that way for many years to come.  Television has built entire Networks devoted solely to professional football (The NFLNetwork), and it seems “all sports” networks like ESPN, NBCSN, and FoxSports 1 might as well be.  It’s safe to say, for at least roughly five months of the year, Americans’ lives are saturated with football content.

            Though it is a league characterized by hard hits, touchdown dances, and intricate play calling, the NFL has long been synonymous with one word: Quarterback.  As the “Leader of all Leaders” no sporting position in the United States is more glamorized or scrutinized, with hours upon hours of Sporting Television devoted to the 32 starting NFL quarterbacks each day.  John Elway, Dan Marino, Johnny Unitas, Peyton Manning, Joe Montana, and Tom Brady are consistently regarded as some of the greatest to ever play the position, and have been referred to as being “pocket passers”, “readers of the defense”, “hard-workers”, “studiers of film”, “mentally tough”, “field generals”, and “smart.”  What seem odd however, is that for a league that has been dominated by African-American players, every athlete I listed above is White.  For the last 40 years, having a White quarterback to lead your team was essentially the “rule”, and there were few exceptions.  But in 2013, there were nine Black quarterbacks starting in week 1, the most in NFL history (Johnson, 2013).  It’s obvious that both Black and White men can excel at the position; however, the ways in which Sporting Television defines the talents of the  “Black quarterback” creates poor representations of these tremendous athletes and of the race as a whole.

           

“The Black is a better athlete to begin with because he's been bred to be that way, because of his high thighs and big thighs that goes up into his back, and they can jump higher and run faster because of their bigger thighs and he's bred to be the better athlete because this goes back all the way to the Civil War when during the slave trade … the slave owner would breed his big Black to his big woman so that he could have a big Black kid”- Jimmy “The Greek” Synder, 1988

            Synder, a CBS sports commentator, was fired for these comments twenty-five years ago when he stated that African-Americans were “bred” to be better athletes than Whites.  The odd thing is, many sports commentators are saying the exact same things today… just not quite as bluntly.  Turn on ESPN and it’s not atypical to find yourself staring at a young quarterback comparison, for example the Black Robert Griffin III (RGIII) being compared to the White Andrew Luck. Before either played an official NFL game, pundits were already comparing Luck and Griffin.  Statistically, both quarterbacks were very similar:  Both lead top-tier Division 1 programs, were multiple year starters and passed for over 10,000 in college, were exceptionally smart student-athletes, and were first and second in a close Heisman voting.  The similarities continued at the NFL Scouting Combine where Griffin proved to be only slightly faster in the 40 yard-dash (by less than .2 seconds) and Luck proved to be only 10 pounds heavier and an inch and a half taller.  Luck and Griffin were drafted one-two in the 2012 draft, marking yet another indication of their sameness. 

Yet, on ESPN’s widely popular debate show, First Take, RGIII (Griffin) was referred to as an “enigma, we don’t know what we’re going to get” based off his ability to run and pass, while Luck was quoted as being the “quintessential prototypical quarterback, you drop back to pass, you purview the landscape, you look at defenses, you call plays, and you wing that football, this dude is the real deal” (First Take).

How could two quarterbacks with so many similarities, two quarterbacks who both played in and won their first preseason games as rookies, be regarded in such different ways?  Was RGIII really that inferior to Luck?  As it turns out, both would go on to have great Rookie NFL seasons, with RGIII being named Rookie of the Year and Luck helping the Colts win nine more games than they did the year prior.  Aside from race, it seems these men could not be any more similar, and yet Luck was looked upon positively for his ability to run an offense, read the defense, and memorize a playbook, while Griffin was considered a mystery because he seemingly only possessed outstanding athletic ability and not much more.

            Both men are excellent quarterbacks, but the consistent representation of Black quarterbacks as “dual threat quarterbacks”, “scramblers”, “natural athletes”, and “possessing great physical intangibles” on sporting television creates for a certain representation of the Black quarterback.  By being continuously praised for their “God-given” abilities (speed, strength, quickness, etc…) rather than skills that come about through hard-work, mental acuity, and effort (accuracy, ability to read defenses, being a field general, etc…) Sporting Television creates a skewed representation of the Black quarterback which in turn may lead viewers to think a certain way regarding Black Americans as a whole.

  As a minority group in America today, the representation of African-Americans on television plays a key role in real-world perception.  It’s quite possible that for many White Americans, their only exposure to Black Americans comes from television, and when the most talked about Black athlete in the most talked about sport is rarely praised for his hard work or effort, it has the potential to put many African-Americans at a disadvantage.  As Casey Gane-McCalla so eloquently states in his blog, “Sports stereotypes have a real effect in the real world. Most employers are not concerned with employees' natural athletic abilities, so stereotypes of African-Americans being athletically superior for the most part do not help Blacks in the real world. However, the stereotypes of Whites being hard working, disciplined and smart are helpful to them in finding employment.”  When there are few alternative sources for information, the portrayals of minorities that make it on television in front of a nation-wide audience hold quite a bit of weight.  By consistently referring back to the Black Quarterbacks’ athletic ability, the other components of their game, such as hard work, effort, and leadership, components that we as an American Society have come to associate with the all-important American Dream, are largely ignored.

            The agenda has been set by Sporting Television, and thus far they have chosen to focus only on certain aspects of the Black quarterbacks’ abilities.  The way Black quarterbacks are portrayed on television reinforces the stereotype that African-Americans are only valued by their bodies rather than their skill, hard work, or brains; a stereotype that is rooted long ago in the Africans’ ability to perform grueling physical labor on plantations.  One of the greatest quarterbacks of all time (who also happens to be Black), Warren Moon, once remarked, “Not only did you have to play well for yourself, but you had to play well for your race.”  Now it seems, the burden of being a Black quarterback means that one not only must play well, but they also must play a certain way to be accepted as a true quarterback, rather than as a “Black quarterback”.  If only winning was the only thing that mattered…

           

Gane-McCalla, C. (2009, April 19). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/casey-ganemccalla/athletic-blacks-vs-smart_b_187386.html

Johnson, T., (2013, September 5). Nfl season opens with 9 starting black quarterbacks. The Grio. Retrieved from http://thegrio.com/2013/09/05/nfl-season-opens-with-9-starting-black-quarterbacks/

NFL Communications Staff. (2013, January 17). The harris poll: Nfl continues 47-year run as america's most popular sport. Retrieved from http://nflcommunications.com/2013/01/17/the-harris-poll-nfl-continues-47-year-run-as-americas-most-popular-sport/

SuperBallerLife. (Producer). (2013, May 22). Skip Bayless and Stephen A Smith on Better Debut - Andrew Luck or RG3! - ESPN First Take [Web Video]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnFQzFg_Mow

The Harmful Effect of Misrepresentation of Female Teenagers in TV

            I’ve always been a sucker for dramatic television shows. In middle school, I watched Laguna Beach, the MTV reality show that followed around high school students and showed what really goes on at Laguna Beach High School. As I grew older, I was drawn to Gossip Girl, the CW series based of a set of books that followed a raunchy crew of Upper East Side high schoolers. These fictional characters were like the Laguna Beach cast on steroids; they had hoards of money, no parental supervision, and New York City at their fingertips. The combination of these things in the show leads to drugs, partying, sex, and everything else parents do not want their vulnerable teens watching. As I watched these shows, I could not help but think to myself that this is not what “normal American” teenagers are like. Shows like Laguna Beach and Gossip Girl, though entertaining, misrepresent American teenagers, especially females. This misrepresentation is problematic because it glamorizes harmful behavior, portrays an unrealistic beauty ideal, and sexualizes young girls, and in turn potentially influences the young teen audience.

            Representation is the way meaning is given to what is depicted via the images on television, which is supposed to stand for the audience (Zimdars, personal communication, September 19, 2013). In this case, the teenagers on the screen are supposed to be representing the teenage audience. There is a misrepresentation, though, since the representation of teenagers in Laguna Beach and Gossip Girl is not reflective of the majority of the teenagers watching the shows.

Laguna Beach featured a group of high school juniors and seniors gallivanting around their beach town on their parents’ money. The teens were shown shopping, partying, hooking up, and causing and handling drama within their friend groups. Parents were hardly ever shown on the show, and when they were, they were often presenting their kids with gifts, like a new car or expensive jewelry. The gifts and the teens’ frivolous shopping created a harmful consumer culture around the show.

 One tradition that stands out to me now as I reflect on the show was the students’ annual spring break trip to Cabo. These students were between the ages of fourteen and eighteen, and they spent their spring breaks at a beach resort in Mexico, with no parental supervision, blatantly drunk while dancing on bars in Mexican nightclubs. Clearly, this is not the average American upbringing, yet it is being portrayed as normal and glamorized to young teens through the media.

When I watched these episodes, I thought how cool it would have been to go on a trip like this. Then again, my parents attempted to ban me from watching Laguna Beach in the first place, so a trip like this was absolutely out of the question. According to a New York Times article regarding Laguna Beach’s negative influence, my parents were not the only ones who did not agree with the activities taking place on the show; one parent said, “the under-age drinking and smoking on the program were negatively influencing her fifth and seventh graders” (Steinhauer, “Real O.C. Starts Objecting to Its MTV Portrayal,”). The activities portrayed in Laguna Beach, though they are risky activities, are made to look like the normal teenager experience, and impressionable teens watching may think this is what their life is supposed to be like and try to change the fact that they are not living this exciting and consequence-less life.

            A few years after Laguna Beach came Gossip Girl, an equally as addictive-yet-problematic show that misrepresented the majority of teenagers. The fictional high school students on Gossip Girl had even less parental supervision than the Laguna Beach students and even more money, which was spent on designer clothes, extravagant parties, and other unrealistic amenities.

The characters in Gossip Girl always had some sort of event or party they were going to, where there was no supervision, drugs and alcohol were present and in-use, and the characters often found themselves in some sort of trouble. These parties were glamorous and lavish; the characters would arrive in limos and were shown spending time and money making sure their appearance was flawless. Similar to Laguna Beach, this demonstrated the consumer culture of the show as well as the sexualization of young girls, an issue that is becoming common in media.

Sex is used as a reward in Gossip Girl, for example, “Blair organizes a scavenger hunt at the prom for her boyfriend Nate: if he finds Blair before midnight, he can claim his prize. Chuck adds a bet to the hunt: if Nate does not find her in time, Chuck himself will collect the prize,” (Van Damme, p. 86). This glamorizes sex, showing it as a game and a way for teenage girls to manipulate boys. Additionally, sex is treated very casually in Gossip Girl, and is often used as part of someone’s scheme or plan.

The Gossip Girl characters are supposedly in high school, so they are minors. Yet, they are regularly shown casually engaging in sexual activities and dressed provocatively. Their appearance also displays unrealistic beauty ideals, which is very harmful to vulnerable teenage viewers. The female characters are thin, have long hair, and represent society’s ideals of “conventional beauty.” For teenage viewers, especially females, the image of beautiful and overly sexualized characters can be quite harmful, as it often leads to the viewers having body image problems, since most viewers do not look like the characters on screen, who are of course portraying what teenage girls are “supposed” to look like. This in turn can lead to the teen audience trying to make themselves look and act like the “normal” characters on screen.

            The misrepresentations and portrayals of teenagers in Laguna Beach and Gossip Girl is problematic not only because it glamorizes potentially dangerous activities and behavior, sexualizes young females and portrays an unrealistic, idealist form of beauty, but also because it depicts to audiences that this is what American teenagers are, or should be, doing. Thinking back to my life as a teenager and most American teenagers that I know, this is not what their lives were like. However, when susceptible teens are watching these shows, no matter how ridiculous they may think they are, there is still potential that teens will think, “maybe this really is how people my age act and I am the one doing it wrong.” The young characters in the show are shown with exciting lives with no consequences for their negative actions, and this could encourage viewers to want to live this lifestyle. One author claims, “… Television functions ‘[...] as a symbolic resource which young people use in making sense of their experiences in relating to others and in organizing their daily lives’,” (Van Damme, p. 80). Teenage audiences may try to associate the on-screen teenagers with their own lives, and since the on-screen teens are portrayed so inaccurately and engaging in dangerous behavior, there is potential harm to the audience that may start to engage in said behaviors.

The Construction of American Horror Story

         With Halloween approaching I thought it was only necessary to talk about a television series that has very quickly become one of the most talked about television shows. American Horror Story brings something completely different to the table in the world of television series. The creators use the classic characteristics of a horror story, but they have turned the enjoyment of suspense into a series which carries on for months. They began the series with the concept of ghosts, and then last season they created an insane asylum with mental ill individuals and aliens combined. Their next season will be called “Coven” and will include the classic pastime characters of witches.

         One thing the creators of American Horror Story do not do is hold back in any way. They have created a scene such as, “a sobbing naked man masturbating” and a line “about snorting cocaine off a high school girl’s nipples” (Hale, “They Said It Had Good Bones"). This series has become known for its unsettling scenes that make you question why you even enjoy watching the show. However, these strange and uncomfortable situations throughout the episodes have people crawling back for more of this common discomforting feeling. The creators have no shame in including any topic that may be considered taboo, even in our sexually expressive society today. This makes the viewer wonder what disturbing thing they will include next to make this series stand out even more from the rest of mainstream series on television today.

         One distinct feature of this television series is its use of episodic serials from season to season. Episodic serials simply means that from one season to another “each season is its own, different characters and setting” (Lecture 9-10-13). The suspense of which new creepy concept the creators will use in each season adds to the enjoyment of this television show. Each season brings something completely new to the table, so you will never feel like the same story is being dragged out. This eliminates feelings of boredom from the viewers, influencing them to then become uninterested in the show. I feel this type of series generates a higher view count overall due to anticipation from the viewers as to what the new seasons will bring. While the season's underlying concepts are fresh and new, there are reoccurring actors and actresses who appear again in season two, and most likely will appear in season three as well. The interesting thing about the reused actors is that they usually possess a completely new set of characteristics. This expresses the diversity and depth of the actors, as they express a wide variety of characteristics throughout each individual season. With some of the actors returning there are also many new actors and actresses who grace the screen with their talents to bring something fresh to the series.

         Within the individual episodes of American Horror Story there are large concepts to comprehend such as the infamous man in the black latex suit, or the mysterious aliens that grace the presence of Kit. While there are themes at large, there are also smaller, less important, themes that are present throughout the series which contribute to the overall larger concept. From the first season there was the teenage love between Violet and the ghost of Tate. There was then the reporter who was locked against her will in the asylum in the second season. Throughout each episode there are constant smaller storyline's that add to the overall appeal of what the larger picture is trying to portray to the audience. While the storyline's are interesting and draw the viewers back over and over again, this show has constant underlying meanings that are sometimes hard to keep up with. The viewer may not realize the connections until later in the season, or may never notice it at all.

         While each season has it own storyline, there are ways in which the writers have made a consistent effort to connect seasons together with or without the viewers noticing. While I am one to say that I have never noticed the subtle clues of what the concept in the next season may be, there have been many critics who have noticed these clues and interpreted what exactly the next season will bring. The creator Murphy says, “Go through it frame by frame. I planted it in there. I will never reveal it” (Ocasio, "‘American Horror Story’ Season 2 Details Revealed: What Happens Next"). If critics don't suffice in exposing these hints, the creators have come out and expressed what they feel the next season should bring. Although, Murphy will not tell exactly what clues are planted within the season he will express what season three can be expected to entail as he states:

“I sorta feel like for the third version I want to do something that’s a little bit more ‘evil glamour.”’ Just something that’s a little bit more…one of the things that I missed this season was I really loved having that Romeo & Juliet youth story with Violet and Tate. I want something like that again and we’re doing something like that in the third season. And we’re contemplating shooting the show in a different place. We’re contemplating shooting it in a place in the country where true horror has been. We’ve got lots of delicious plans” (Yeoman, "‘American Horror Story’ Creator Reveals Season 3 Hints").

         American Horror Story is definitely a series that steps out of the box when comparing it to most television series at this time. The writers test the norms of what television should entail in our society today. While I'm sure there are large groups of individuals who may find the provocative and alluring themes of this series offensive, I feel that if you are looking for something different that brings excitement and suspense to your everyday television series, American Horror Story is definitely for you! Everyone should watch at least one season of this series and experience the tantalizing themes to determine if it is just the extra something you need in your television lifestyle.

Sources:

Hale, Mike. "They Said It Had Good Bones." 'American Horror Story' on FX. N.p., 04 Oct. 2011. Web. 24 Sept. 2013. <http://tv.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/arts/television/american-horror-story-on-fx- review.html?_r=1>.
Ocasio, Anthony. "‘American Horror Story’ Season 2 Details Revealed: What Happens Next." Screen Rant. N.p., Sept. 2012. Web. 24 Sept. 2013. <http://screenrant.com/american-horror-story- season-2-spoilers-aco-144926/>.
Yeoman, Kevin. "‘American Horror Story’ Creator Reveals Season 3 Hints." Screen Rant. N.p., Jan. 2013. Web. 24 Sept. 2013. <http://screenrant.com/american-horror-story-season-3/>.

Breaking Bad and Fiend On Meth

We’ve heard it before; drugs are bad and cause people to become poor, freeloading, lowlives. Particularly, we know that meth is as bad as it gets. Whether shooting it up or smoking it, the side effects of long-term meth abuse are nothing to be desired. So, if the PSA’s and lectures have instilled in our minds that meth is a horrible drug that will make your teeth look like you’ve been on a diet of dirt and rocks, why has meth use and distribution become the center of TV’s most thrilling narrative, “Breaking Bad”? And if meth distribution is truly the key to success, as depicted in earlier seasons of the show, why aren’t we all running out to cook in our own RVs right now?

 “Breaking Bad” seems to be the pioneer of the modern day meth-narrative, perhaps inspiring the world of literature to cash in on the phenomenon as well.  Fiend, a 2013 zombie apocalyptic novel, finds main character Chase Daniels coming out of a meth induced high to a little girl ripping open a Rottweiler. As the novel progresses Daniels is faced with the realization that while he was busy experiencing the finest trip meth has to offer, the rest of the world, sans a few of his meth-head friends, succumbed to a phenomenon that turned them all into giggling zombies. Daniels eventually comes to the conclusion, after visiting his dealer, The Albino, that “everyone still alive is addicted to methamphetamines.” (Stenson, 68)

So, if meth can make you billions of dollars and act as the one thing that can make your survival of a zombie apocalypse possible, is it really that bad? Unfortunately for those of you contemplating putting on your tighty-whiteys and calling up your high school chemistry teacher, a closer analysis of these meth-based stories demonstrate that narratives like “Breaking Bad” and Fiend, act as metaphors for meth use itself. Through the deterioration of each story’s protagonist, Gina Piccalo comments, meth storylines “[mirror] the substance’s corrosive effect on American culture.”

According to the Pat Moore Foundation, a meth high results in “extremely pleasurable…euphoria,” followed by a period of paranoia and agitation. By season 3 of “Breaking Bad,” Walter and his sidekick Jesse Pinkman are making a sizeable amount of cash cooking their blue product. However in this instance, it is not the drug that's directly providing the high for Walt. The creators blatantly address meth’s effects through Jesse’s use in seasons 1 and 2, but enhance the metaphorical narrative through the high Walt gets from a good cook. Walt’s production of the blue sky provides him with the exhilaration of knowing the profit will take care of his family, equivalent to the rush of a meth user. However, as with the physical use of meth, Walt experiences paranoia stemming from his desire to produce a good product and not get caught by his DEA agent brother-in-law. Walt becomes addicted to meth, but not in the same overt way a drug addict is; he is addicted to the “sheer enjoyment of coming out on top” (Collins) by creating the most pure product on the street while simultaneously financially providing for his family. The narrative in “Breaking Bad” provides a parallel to the use of meth, as well as a parallel to the narrative of Fiend.

After beating down zombies in his pursuit to find more survivors, Chase fully realizes that all he has left is meth and the thought of literally using to stay alive without societal ramifications is ideal. When looters kill The Albino, Chase realizes that he is “pretty close to being fucked” (Stenson, 73) as his supply is limited without his meth-chef. Because he is such a long-time user, the narrative bypasses the majority of euphoria in favor of highlighting the adverse effects

Stenson’s narrative contrasts to the narrative of Walt provided in “Breaking Bad” as it more literally depicts the needs of an addict, although the narrative suggests Chase’s use is all right because it is a matter of life and death, as some addicts feel. However, Chase’s need for “larger amounts to get high”(Pat Moore Foundation) after he has shot up his last rock from The Albino is based on his literal need to stay alive. This survival instinct represents the phase in which an addict feels without using, they will die.

 Meth “can doom a story just as it dooms the lives of its users.” (Piccalo) The metaphor comes full circle as Chase and Walt “use [meth] until it destroys their lives and the lives of the people who care about them.” (Ewing) Ultimately, Chase is forced to succumb to death when his supply runs out, after everyone he knows has left him or died. Similarly, the narrative emphasizes Walt’s alienation from his family and priority shift in favor of the drug. For both characters, the narrative was never about whether they will fall, “the only question is how far [they’ll] fall” (Collins) alluding to the idea that while using meth, failure, and presumably death, are inevitable. These metaphorical narratives directly parallel the cycle of a meth addict, seen through Walt’s “rock bottom,” and Chase’s death.  The two narratives provide an insight into the two options of a meth user’s demise; either you lose the important values and people in your life, or you die.

So while some critics worry the portrayal of meth within these narratives will have glorifying effects within the United States, it, in fact, may do the opposite. “Breaking Bad” and Fiend can instead be read as metaphorical narratives for the detrimental effects of meth use and association. However, one disclaimer should be noted. We cannot verify that meth will not be the key to surviving the zombie apocalypse, but based on Brad Pitt in “World War Z,” only the pretty people survive, so it’s safe to say survival won’t be the result of shooting up some of Walt’s finest blue sky.

The 'Gilmore Girls' are more than just a pretty face

Before Gilmore Girls aired, there were few, if any, shows that incorporated pregnant teens into a storyline. Now if you flip on the television, it’s hard to avoid teen pregnancy! You’ve got Teen Mom, 16 and pregnant, The Secret Life of the American Teenager; the list goes on. And this fascinates society. Why? In 2008, New York Daily News reported that seventeen girls made a pact to get pregnant and raise their kids together. Could there be a connection between stories like this and shows like Gilmore Girls and Teen Mom that center off teen pregnancy? Does it make you wonder if Gilmore Girls were based off Lorelei’s life when she was 16-20 years old raising Rory if the show had been as successful as it was? The show Gilmore Girls could be seen as a sign of foreshadowing in the television industry.

            Gilmore Girls highlights the aftermath of Lorelei’s pregnancy. It shows her life starting at 32 when her daughter, Rory, is 16. Occasionally, it refers back to how she lived at an Inn raising Rory, and how she worked her way up and now owns the Inn. The viewers get a glimpse into how Lorelei grew up through her parents. The wealthy lifestyle of Emily and Richard Gilmore is an interesting and important aspect of the show.

Richard, a successful insurance worker, and Emily, a Daughters of the American Revolution member, are prime candidates that display the idea of patriarchy. It is very clear that Richard is the man of the house, the breadwinner, the provider, etc. They live by the status quo. In one episode, Richard and Emily become flustered when they hear Rory has gone to her boyfriend’s home for a family dinner. Rory’s boyfriend’s family is close friends of Emily and Richard, and of equal status to them. They demand a dinner with Rory and her boyfriend at their home to level the playing field. They say how embarrassed they are since the window of time was quickly closing where it would no longer be acceptable. Another example is when Lorelei becomes pregnant and her and her boyfriend’s parents (also friends with Emily and Richard and of equal status) encourage Lorelei’s boyfriend to propose, because it is the right thing to do. This notion of patriarchy, status quo, proper etiquette, and high society life is what Emily and Richards’s life is all about. And we get to see that in almost every episode when Lorelei and Rory go to Friday night dinners at their fabulous home.

Emily is also a great example of post-feminism. She hires maids, a new one in every episode, and fires them for the smallest things. She rarely gets to know their names because they are not employed long enough. Viewers can see that Emily loves the power that comes from the ability to control things through her money. She wants her home to be perfect for her husband, her family, her friends, and her guests. This further demonstrates the kind of lifestyle and society in which Emily and Richard Gilmore are a part of.

            The town of Stars Hollow, where Lorelei and Rory’s home is, on the other hand, is one of those towns where everyone knows each other. It gives off a folk feel, with Renaissance fairs and town troubadours. The music is very authentic. The music plays throughout the show, but I’ve noticed only when the characters are featured in Stars Hollow. The music helps set the tone of the town to the viewers. The town is like one giant family. In one episode, Rory has a birthday party with the entire town. The very last episode of the series shows the town wanting to go to Rory’s graduation ceremony at Yale. This tight-knit, protective group is what makes the show so lovable. It proves that people of all ages can be best friends and love and support each other. That is something that makes Gilmore Girls unique and what other television programs just don’t showcase.

             One of the most evident aspects of the show is the family dynamic between Lorelei and Rory. It is very uncommon to see a mother and daughter so close, where they act like sisters, or best friends. And noticeably absent is a man in the household. The Gilmore girls have a more modern take on gender roles. In one episode, the girls and Rory’s boyfriend are watching a show that portrays a woman in the 50’s who consistently has a perfect appearance and family. She cooks for her family every night, and Lorelei and Rory joke the show must have been written by a man. Dean, Rory’s boyfriend, counter argues that the woman may enjoy cooking for her family, and he thinks the concept is “kinda nice”. The girls, while eating pizza they had ordered, looked at him like he was crazy. That is because Lorelei and Rory’s lifestyle is the complete opposite of what this show portrays a woman to be.

The female dominance in Gilmore Girls is what may draw female viewers. It is a refreshing change from other programming or lifestyles where it is primarily male dominated. This may help women identify with the characters as well. Single moms are represented through this show. Teen girls are also represented in this show. Shockingly, all teen girls are not Serena Van Der Woodsen. There are some normal, quiet girls just trying to get through high school, go to a good college, and not be heartbroken or bullied. Many shows do not feature a storyline like this because it is ‘ordinary’ and not as interesting as a rich, spoiled teen. But by combing this with a character like Lorelei, who has spunk, comedy and a strong work ethic, it is a story people want to follow. Viewers find themselves rooting for the characters to fall in love, be happy, and succeed. Viewers feel a part of Stars Hollow, and that is what makes a quality television show. 

Heroic Trends: Super-powered Edition

The second season of Warner Bros.’ “Arrow” will debut on the CW this fall alongside the premiere season of Disney’s “Agents of Shield.” Superheroes on TV are not a new thing, but what these studios have in mind for them are far from what old shows like “The Incredible Hulk” or the campy legend of Adam West’s “Batman” could ever hope to amount to. This current trend of superhero TV, I think is due in part to the superhero craze sweeping Hollywood right now. Disney and Marvel pulled all the stops and release the hero ensemble “The Avengers.” The blockbuster success of the movie signaled to the studios that superheroes are here to stay and that everybody loves them.

A small detail that many superhero fans are ecstatic about this fall is that “Arrow” will debut The Flash as a secondary character. Then The Flash will get a spin off series of his own. This has lead to many fans theorizing that this could be the start of DC’s universe in order to compete with the juggernaut that is Marvel. While Marvel, riding on the astronomical success of “The Avengers,” is debuting their own TV series to expand on their own universe.

The two TV shows are being released because TV as a medium offers another way to expand the never ending universe of superheroes. TV is an inexpensive, compared to movies, way to elaborate on character stories or bring in minor ones without spending huge amounts of money on a single film only to fail at the box office, we have the Green Lantern movie and numerous others to thank for that little lesson.

TV offers writers and producers more freedom than movies to expand on an existing narrative. Shows today average about an hour per episode while movies clock in around 1.5 to 2 hours. So think about it, given that movies have much higher production qualities than tv, would you watch a story that lasts about 2 hours in one chunk or watch about 20 chunks of the same story about an hour each? TV gives producers that. They can flesh out characters’ background and give them more screen time, instead of glossing over them, what many movies tend to do for the sake of time. The structuring of TV itself seems like the most natural home for comic book heroes. Shows play out like issues of a comic book, new episodes every week.

Andy Greenwald points out that the trend could also be in contrast to all the bad guy shows popping up. Many of the most beloved characters of today’s TV are villains like Walt from “Breaking Bad” and these superhero show are adding a little variety to today’s picks. Who doesn't like a good guy they can get behind and save the day? Or are we all too mature now and want the character whose morally ambiguous, where not everything is black and white.

Andy also points out that all these superhero shows could be a bad idea. He thinks that they will burn out too quickly. Citing shows like “Heroes” or “No Ordinary Family” to prove his point. I mean, sure they won’t look as good as the movies but one key component that TV does very well is that it can tell stories. HBO and AMC has shown that they can make high quality TV that could be argued are much better than some of their cinematic counterparts. If one of these studios produced a superhero show along the likes of “Breaking Bad” or “Game of Thrones,” you can be sure that I would be ready with my bucket of popcorn.

ABC seems to agree with me that superhero TV will be a big hit this coming fall. “The network is so confident ... against TV's top-rated scripted show, CBS' crime juggernaut "NCIS." (Baker and Richwine).ABC seems like it is banking on the billion dollar success that is the Marvel Cinematic Universe.In the article, ABC says that it did well in the tests audiences and hopes to attract a new younger audience that is different from the older demographic that watches NCIS. I think this is very doable. This is a special case because Marvel has already proven that they can sell stuff couple that with the media giant that is Disney, it is hard to think that this series will fail.

Another thing that this has going for it is that Joss Whedon is writing for it. This guy has proven that he can write one hell of a narrative. Hits that are under his belt include Buffy the vampire slayer and Firefly. There is no doubt that this guy can write a great narrative and as talked about earlier, I think that TV shows win over movies because of their ability to have deeper narratives.

These two series are on the verge of a soon to be wave in television. In the past superhero TV has proven to be lackluster to other genres of shows but that was before. Now these two shows are coming off the backs of their cinematic big brothers and they show no sign slowing down.

Works Cited

Baker, Liana B., and Lisa Richwine. "ABC Bets TV Viewers Will Marvel at Superhero Show." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 14 May 2013. Web. 16 Sept. 2013. <http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/14/entertainment-us-upfronts-abc-idUSBRE94D12W20130514>.

Greenwald, Andy. "Exiled in Smallville." Grantland.com. 

ESPN Internet Ventures, 08 May 2013. Web. 15 Sept. 2013.  

<http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9253869/arrow-problem-superheroes-tv>.

“Modern Family” Gender Roles and Stereotypes

Exodus Cardoza

TV Criticism

September 26, 2013

“Modern Family” Gender Roles and Stereotypes

            ABC’s episodic series Modern Family was introduced into the hearts of Americans all across the country in September 2009. The hit comedy series features three families, all of which have a closely-knit bond with one another, and are all part of one big family.  Modern Family deals with the traditional family as portrayed by the Dunphys. It also introduces the homosexual family lifestyle in the Princhett-Tuckers and a mixed marriage in the Pritchetts, who are an older and younger couple. The combination of traditional and new elements within the show grow from the mixed discourse that the show portrays. The elements from every family help viewers look into each family structure deeper. This proves that the title of the show is a bit misleading. Modern Family also elevates traditional gender roles and stereotypes of women and race. Much like the episodes of Roseanne and All in the Family, they depict women as having a weaker stance in society.

            The traditional Dunphy family consists of Phil and Claire Dunphy and their three children Haley, Alex and Luke. Phil, the father, is the source of income for the family, while Claire is the stay-at-home mother. The construction of Claire’s character is based on the creation of the gender stereotypes that society and prime time television through the years have place upon women in general and women in relationships. This stereotype presents women as weaker and inferior to men, they do not contribute to the family in terms of income, and the men have power over the household. Claire’s identity consists of such characteristics including motherhood, family orientation and domesticity. We see instances of the gender stereotype actually flipped. For example, in the episode “Phil’s New Car,” Phil’s duty for the day is to go out and purchase a new vehicle for the family as Claire instructs him to do. Already this episode from the beginning challenges the stereotype that men have the power in the relationship because Phil, a man, is given an order by Claire, a woman. Phil comes back with a black sports car, clearly not a family vehicle. Claire is clearly upset at him for not purchasing a vehicle that is suitable for a family. This episode offers a resistance to the image society has portrayed about women in the household though television.

            The Prichett family consists of Jay and Gloria Prichett and their son Manny Delgado-Princhett. The Princhett family is different from the other two because it depicts an interracial marriage. This deviates from the norm in society today by pointing out Gloria’s Latin American upbringing and visibly showing the age difference that exists between the two adults. Much like the Duphys, the dominant ideology enforced about men having more power is seen in the Prichett family. Jay, the husband and father, is the family’s income provider, while Gloria, the wife and mother, is the stay-at-home mom who cooks, cleans and serves the family.  Not only does Modern Family enforce the hegemony society has adopted about women in the Prichett household, it also further enforces racial stereotypes against Hispanics. Gloria has a ditzy persona, often misusing phrases, mispronouncing words and saying whatever is on her mind even though it might hurt another character’s feeling or come off wrong. In the episode “Planes, Trains and Cars” Gloria and Jay are engaged in conversation, Gloria does not want to fly in a helicopter. But, in explaining it to Jay she has trouble searching for the right word, “helicopter.” Gloria then asks, “How do you say it in English the takatakatka?” Jay responds saying, “Helicopter.” The helicopter example stereotypes members of the Hispanic community as not knowledgeable of the English language. Do not get me wrong, I love this show and everything about it. It is hilarious. But the show’s creative staff believes that by perpetuating these stereotypes against Latinos it is only poking fun at how society portrays this certain group. However, is really does nothing to improve the views of Latinos in the mainstream American ideology. If anything it further embellishes Latinos.

            The Prichett-Tuckers are the same sex couple consisting of Cameron Tucker Mitchell Prichett and their adopted baby girl Lily Prichett-Tucker. The Prichett-Tuckers have stereotypical masculine and feminine traits because they are a gay couple. However, they take those stereotypical traits and serve them up in various ways that do not allow for either to become a label. For example, Cameron fits the feminine roles better then Mitchell since he is more outgoing and colorful. He is more likely to stand up for what he believes in, and he is also the more athletic of the two and is a better handy man. Mitchell looks and fits the characteristics of the breadwinner in a family. Yet he is very non-athletic, worries about everything and is very dependent on Cam, characteristics that one would associate with a feminine character. Mitchell has a clear goal of being the masculine figure in his daughter’s life, but his character contradicts the traditional characteristics that have been formed through stereotypes of what it means to be a man in society today. It would have been easy to make each character stereotypically homosexual with no depth in their portrayal. Instead Modern Family did a great job in mixing and matching masculine and feminine traits within the couple.

                  Overall ABC’s Modern Family enforces many stereotypes towards women and Latinos. But the show also does a great job in depicting situations and actions that pull away from those stereotypes which are ingrained in the minds of people of our society today. Modern Family helps us look into certain situations that our society may not be used to because of what television has depicted through its existence over the years.  It is a great show and I would recommend it to anyone. Each couples different dynamics depicts a situation that is everything but modern.