Fitting In

The connection between clothing and identity is a prominent theme throughout this unit.  “Wings” by Macklemore really brings into question the importance that we place on clothing and material possessions in our society.  His video criticizes the consumerism that literally consumes people, especially young people.  His friend’s brother was murdered because of his shoes, and by the end of the song, Macklemore reflects on how his opinion of clothing changed.  He says that now he just sees his Nikes as another pair of shoes, but as a child he saw them as a part of who he was.  In “About Wings” Macklemore says that this was his intent when recording this song.  I think that this idea is really instilled in young kids in America.  The Spike Lee commercial, this idea is reiterated.  Despite Michael Jordan saying that his success does not stem from his shoes, they are the focus of the commercial.  At the very end, there is a disclaimer that says that Nike does not necessarily support the opinions of Michael Jordan.  This is a ploy to get people to buy their shoes.  They are equating success with shoes instead of with talent and hard work.  They want people, especially teenagers, to believe that buying a pair of Jordan’s can change their lives.  Merchants of Cool also examines how style and fashion are seen by kids.  The documentary’s main point is that younger generations are constantly looking for the “cool” trends.  These “cool hunters” look at how “cool” kids influence those around them.  Though the concept seemed odd to me, I think the idea that kids can be deemed “cool” based on their appearance is very prominent in our culture.  There is a common perception in middle and high schools that what you wear and how you look determines how cool you are or what group you fit into.  In the Abercrombie and Fitch video and article, the founder of the company states that he does not want homeless people or larger women wearing his clothes because the company’s main consumer base is the “cool kids.”  Again, the idea that “coolness” is directly correlated with clothing is the main focus of this text.  Personally, I loved that that guy found all of the A&F clothing and gave it to homeless people; I think that his message is great.  Clothing should not define who we are as a person or as a society. There should be no rules about who should be able to wear what because clothing really is just clothing.  I feel like somewhat of a hypocrite saying that because I do enjoy clothes to an extent, but I have never been obsessive or let what I wear determine how I feel about myself as a person. “The Jacket” tells the story of a young boy who allows one guacamole-colored jacked to dictate his attitude and outlook on life.  He blames the jacket for all of his failures and missed opportunities, when in reality, he just has a bad attitude.  However, the message in this story is clear: the connection between clothing and identity is a powerful one.  Even the simple, light-hearted “What’s Your Street Style?” quiz sends a similar message.  It says, “You are what you wear!” in the description, reinforcing this idea that our clothing is intertwined with our identity as a person.  Though what you wear should never dictate who somebody is or will become, it is a common belief in kids and young adults.  I think that clothing can be used as a way of self-expression or a way to present an image of ones’ self, but it should not have the power to control if somebody is “cool” or “uncool.”  I know that I have been guilty of judging people by what they wear, and I think that many people do.  For example, if somebody shows up to an interview in slacks, a blouse, and a blazer I will probably assume that they are more professional than somebody who shows up in sweat pants and a sweatshirt.  However, I think that the type of judging that needs to be eliminated is the kind that many of us remember from our middle and high school years; the kind that causes kids to be self-conscious just because their jeans are from Walmart instead of Nordstrom.  I don’t want kids to believe that what they wear defines who they are or who they can become.

The Prince and The Pauper

While I have always believed and bought into the notion that “money doesn’t buy happiness,” the texts in this unit seemed to be saying otherwise… and I get it.  When I initially looked at the chart “Money & Happiness”, I was surprised because, like I said, I had never bought into that correlation.  However, after examining the rest of the readings, I can see why the chart may hold more truth than I first believed.  “Guest: Show respect for fast-food workers with sufficient pay” really plays to the idea of this correlation.  Fernando Cruz seems to be a good, honest man who does not have a whole lot of options when it comes to his job.  I am sure that he would rather work somewhere else where he has a higher salary, doesn’t have to work 10-12 hour days, and gets respect from others.  So, maybe he would be happier if he had more money because he would be less worried about supporting his family.  However, he may not have the means to get a better job due to lack of education and experience.  Additionally, as we discussed in previous units, race carries more weight in the real world than we would like to believe, and Fernando Cruz appears to be either Latino or Hispanic.  I thought the critic in “Pay fast-food workers with sufficient wages” was much too harsh.  To me, it seemed that this article was saying that somebody must be financially stable to deserve a family and a decent job.  However, what this person was not taking into account was the cultural capital and other factors that influence a person’s economic mobility and success in achieving one’s goals.  As I said before, some people may be working in fast food because it is their only option.  Just as “Why U.S. Taxpayers Pay $7 Billion a Year” article points out, 52% of fast food workers are signed up for some sort of public assistance program.  Additionally, the majority of the workers are adults who are the primary breadwinners in their household.  At the very least, these employees deserve respect for doing the jobs that most people consider to be low-class.  I do not believe that society should condemn or look down upon those people merely because they have fewer opportunities than, say, somebody who was born into a wealthy family and never had to work very hard to get or keep an education or well-paying job. 

            “Million-Pound Bank Note” by Mark Twain and Trading Places trailer play on the idea that the life of the poor is a game for the rich.  These two texts also have very similar plots.  In both, two wealthy men make bets about how a poor man will bode when given the opportunity to live large.  Though I have never seen Trading Places, it seems that Eddie Murphy’s character was simply picked off of the street to fill the place of Dan Aykroyd’s wealthy character.  The two men who picked up Murphy appeared to do so only because he was poor (and maybe black?).  Similarly, in Twain’s play, Gordon and Abel select Henry for their bet only because he is poor and honest-looking.  Henry and Murphy’s character are mere puppets in a high-stakes bet by wealthy men who hold all of the power and control.  I do not know what happens at the end of Trading Places, but in “Million-Pound Bank Note” Henry finds out that he was basically used, but he does not seem to care at all—not what I was expecting.  This short story also seems to be a commentary on the idea that wealth alone makes you well respected, but that having wealth also makes you exempt from spending your money as well.  Even today, it seems that our rich and famous (celebrities) are the ones that get so much for free, or they get paid for merely bringing attention to businesses, places, etc.  I think that Inequality For All does a good job of tying everything together by emphasizing that in the United States, there is the greatest income inequality.  Just as the other texts reveal, the divide between poor and rich is vast.  Robert Reich stresses that as a nation, we have to protect American workers because they are the foundation of this country.  So, after reading these texts, I again wonder, does money buy happiness? Does it buy respect? Power?

Man v. Man

I thought that there were a few things that connected these articles besides masculinity.  Most of the texts from this week explored the violence of mankind, and some also touched on race.

I found “The Most Dangerous Game” to be a very interesting short story about the faults of humanity.  General  Zaroff hunts humans because he grew bored of hunting animals.  He also says that he hunts “the scum of the earth” which includes blacks, Chinese Indians, and whites.  He is also excited by his next target, a strong, black, resourceful-looking man.  Race is briefly touched on in this story, but the larger idea is that of human violence towards other human beings.  While this short story is unrealistic to most readers, it can also be seen as a commentary about man’s lust for violence and death.  The author suggests that violence is a way to escape boredom.  The General saw the hunting of humans as a sport which brought him happiness and entertainment at the expense of other people’s injuries and deaths.

Football was mentioned in a few of the readings this week.  While the purpose of football is not to kill the opponent, there are also elements of violence and entertainment in this sport.  “Dying to Play” and “How CTE Affects the Brain” explore the ways in which football affects the men who play the game.  The articles cover the severe consequences that have been shown to result from injuries that occur because of football.  Football is a fun and exciting sport to watch, but NFL players may find themselves regretting their career choice if they suffer any of the possible injuries or diseases mentioned in the articles.  Even though the players are not immediately dying on the field during games, they are essentially setting themselves up for a painful or short post-career future. 

“Bob Costas on gun control” discusses football and the gun culture and violence in his interview.  He talks about how guns are too readily available, leading to increased gun violence.  He also touches on race and class when he mentions the gun violence in inner cities and the arming of black youths.  I agree with Costas that there needs to be stricter regulations in order to prevent such violence.  However, I also agree that people will find other ways to commit crimes.  “When Will It End?” is an example of the continued violence that exists due to racial discrimination.  The victims were often chased or pursued and then violently murdered merely based on their skin color. 

The two texts I could not really fit into the violence theme were “9 Rules for the Black Birdwatcher” and “Chris Rock Tiger Woods.”  Both of these texts focus on race, and the Chris Rock video also highlights the sport of golf, but not in a violent way like the other sport-centered texts.  This article and video explore how racial stereotypes are still alive and well, even in modern times.  The video about Tiger Woods illustrates the ways that black athletes are categorized and the ways that black people perceive certain sports.  The birdwatcher article was satirical and played on the same idea that black people are only supposed to enjoy and participate in certain sports.