Altrusim, and the Genetically Predetermined Human Spirit

When last I discussed the construction of human identity, the topic of serial killers and the influence of society on them was considered. Via ‘American Psycho’s Patrick Bateman, I addressed different theories of cultural studies regarding the notion that our self-identity is entirely comprised of fragments of societal influences. This would imply that a psychotic is the result of a psychotic environment or upbringing. But real-life American psycho Ted Bundy was raised in an arguably normal environment, and still emerged with homicidal tendencies. Two people can grow up in nearly identical circumstances and produce two entirely different kinds of people. To assign responsibility for personal identity entirely to acculturation begs the biological question of genetic predisposition.

As I will soon detail, modern culture work is focused on pinpointing the balance between both societal influence and biological determinism when analyzing today’s post-modern identities. And, as both culture and science rapidly hybridize with technology, I believe a cinematic trend has emerged. As self-reflexive, post-modern audiences cope with the complexities of the societal, technological, and biological influences on their existence, filmmakers address the intricate controversy by essentializing the inexpressible human condition. I will be using cultural studies to explore modern depictions of hypothetical futures in science-fiction cinema affected by population control, artificial intelligence and biological hybridization, as well as betrayal by the system to determine essential, normative, but autogenous ideals of self-sacrifice and cooperation.

EUGENICS:POPULATION/CONTROL



Our culture is fast approaching the end of the border of science-fiction and tumbling into a scientific reality. Our culture is rationalizing and measuring like never before, grasping at strands of meaning as mainstream religions continue to fail the changes of post-modern society. Bryan Turner dubs this the “somatic society,... in which a ‘major political and personal problems are both problematized within the body and expressed through it” (Barker, 118). Aptly named for the sedating affects of the widely distributed tranquilizer in Aldous Huxley’s future of ‘A Brave New World’, the concept of a ‘somatic society’ addresses the nature of sociobiology and genetic determinism, as seen in films like ‘Gattaca’ and ‘Equilibrium’.

Sociobiology is a branch of biological sciences that explores the biological evolution of a society and the socialized individuals within that society. As explained by Edward O. Wilson in his paper titled “Heredity”, humans have a social structure that cannot be mistaken for the patterns of insects or reptiles. For example, we are comprised of small social circles and long childhoods of maternal reliance. Wilson cites the 1945 research of anthropologist George P. Murdock, who listed the recorded characteristics of “every culture known to history and ethnography:

Age-grading, athletic sports, bodily adornment, calendar, cleanliness training, community organization, cooking, cooperative labor, cosmology, courtship, dancing, decorative art, divination, division of labor, dream interpretation, education, eschatology, ethics, ethno-botany, etiquette, faith healing, family feasting, fire making, folklore, food taboos, funeral rites, games, gestures, gift giving, government, greetings, hair styles, hospitality, housing, hygiene, incest taboos, inheritance rules, joking, kin groups, kinship nomenclature, language, law, luck superstitions, magic, marriage, mealtimes, medicine, obstetrics, penal sanctions, personal names, population policy, postnatal care, pregnancy usages, property rights, propitiation of supernatural beings, puberty customs, religious ritual, residence rules, sexual restrictions, soul concepts, status differentiation, surgery, tool making, trade, visiting, weaving, and weather control.” (Wilson, 1978:15)

Although there are some irrefutable observations that sociobiology determines, not all aspects of the study find consensus- especially amongst sociologists and culturalists who believe that these findings are biologically reductionist, “that there are invariant features of human genetic endowment that are resistant to change.” (Barker, 112) The idea that a rigid science could impose limitations on our free-will and agency can be offensive to a post-modern society that practices self-awareness, and to a lesser degree, self-improvement. However, science and culture are inextricably linked. Barker remarks in the book ‘Cultural Studies’ that “culture forms an environment for the human body and feeds into evolutionary change. Hence, environmental change, which includes the social and cultural aspects of human life, can change biological development outcomes” (113). We are coming to see the fruition of this understanding, and science is gently being urged towards the manipulation of DNA to improve human lifespan.



In the film ‘Gattaca’(1997), the main character, Vincent, is a naturally born man in a world of where genetic pre-determinations can be made in utero to emphasize the strongest genetic material possible during your development. Therefore, when Vincent tries to pursue a career as an astronaut, he is discriminated against for being ‘genetically inferior’. Through this film, we begin to see the dangers of this biologial reductionism. Once we begin to assign definitions and values to the flesh, we can more easily discern and ascribe material value to a personhood, and thus, an identity.

Vincent is forced to “borrow” the identity of a genetically superior person who has been crippled. They lend him DNA samples so that he may pass all the various physical exams to qualify for the high-ranking position he seeks. This is a portrayal of a hypothetical near future, but Barker is already recognizing the consequences in today’s society: “Biological reductionism...has [made it] apparent that ill heath is distributed differentially by age, class, gender, place, etc” (122).

This sort of future is nearly upon us- the use of enacting ‘disciplinary bodies’, that is, according to philosopher Michel Foucault, “the mechanism of ‘policing’ societies by which a population can be categorized and ordered into manageable groups” (Barker, 121). To differentiate and value individuals based on their health is already in motion through modern insurance systems, and easy to conceptualize through Gattaca.

Another film that utilizes the control of biology is the 2002 film ‘Equilibrium’. In this fictional society, the film’s main character, John, is a high-ranking government official that participates in the location and execution of ‘sense offenders’. ‘Sense offenders’ are people who choose not to submit to the mandatory government instilled mood equalizers. The tranquilizers negate all emotions of sympathy and compassion, which also removes many of the loving activities noted by George Murdock above. When John misses a dose of the drug, he begins to feel natural emotions again continues neglecting the drug.

Barker notes an important point about the nature of chemical emotions: “Though emotions are culturally mediated, the sharing of broad emotional reactions is one of the features that forge us together as human beings. We all feel fear and we all have the potential to love” (128). Both ‘Gattaca’ and ‘Equilibrium’ work to recognize the innate, essential qualities of humanity to practice self-sacrifice and compassion. In the case of Gattaca, we see the people around Vincent sacrificing their adherence to the system to see someone who has already lived past science’s projections to fulfill a dream. Even when using science as its foundation, society cannot measure an innate aspect of human survival. In Gattaca, the preference for emotion and sensual indulgence is portrayed. We also see the stark contrast of immediate compassion when compared with the gray emotionless world that surround the ‘sense offenders’. John, without being surrounded by a culture of compassion nor being taught the nature of compassion immediately falls into the practice of doing so, regardless. This films works to illustrate evolutionary biology’s suggestion that there is a high “likelihood that there are cultural universals.” (Barker, 128)

A.I.:ARTIFICIAL/IDENTITY



Science-fiction uses artificiality and the construction of an identity to highlight the binary relationship to humans. In a Saussurian sense, knowing the artificial interpretation of technology gives us insight into what actual humanity is. Science-fiction enables the exploration of identity and reality by fully constructing artificial versions of them and asking audiences what the essential differences are.

It has been suggested that the advent of technology has pushed the concept of a self-identity to the forefront. “For Elias, the very concept of ‘I’ as a self-aware object is a modern western conception that emerged out of science and the ‘Age of Reason’. People in other cultures do not always share the individualistic sense of uniqueness and self-consciousness that is widespread in western societies.” (Barker, 216) According to Stuart Hall, this is an example of western society as an ‘enlightened subject’, which is “based on a conception of the human person as a fully centered, unified individual, endowed with the capacities of reason, consciousness, and action, whose ‘centre’ consisted of an inner core...The essential centre of the self was a person’s identity. ” (Barker, 219)

In science-fiction, audiences are exposed to concepts like these and then allowed to see the theoretical implications of living in the world we are watching ourselves create. Humans create machines to instill convenience in their lives, offloading monotonous tasks. In these fictions, we see the machines get increasingly more sophisticated in function. In ‘Blade Runner’ (1982), the androids, known as ‘replicants’, were off-world slaves. ‘The Matrix’ (1999) repeats this theme as indentured robot slaves rebel against their human oppressors. In ‘Terminator’ (1984), the Skynet networking system became self-aware and initiates a nuclear holocaust on the humans.

In the case of ‘Blade Runner’, replicants are made entirely in the human image. They are capable of intelligent language and signification. They are capable of highly complicated, self-aware reasoning skills, enough to create their own agency and rebel against their creators. A bounty hunter, Dekkert, is hired to retrieve a band of runaway replicants, and in the process falls in love with one. How can the post-modern, self-aware audience account for the difference between a real human self and an other made in the image of our selves? Through enlightenment and reason, it would seem that for all intents and purposes the replicants have become free agents, and thus, human. Audiences are capable of making these associations because of the sympathetic, essentially human characteristics of affection witnessed between Dekkert and the replicant.

A different perspective causes rationality to again tug at our conception of identity. Returning to ‘The Matrix’ and ‘Terminator’, we see that these artificial intelligences are just as self-aware and capable of rationalization. They have agency and motivation as many culturalists note as the key to identity. By chance of unintended evolution, these robots are also capable of sociological selves formed in relation to their environment (Barker, 220), triggered by some sort of arrangement of complex computations or even faulty programming. But we do not give them as much empathy or credit. The only discernible difference is the lack of compassion, the pure hatred and destruction that seems to be the aim of these films’ post-war machines. If we understand these androids to define humanity by acting as their binary, we again see that science-fiction is defining humanity as essentially altruistic, instinctively drawn to a sense of justice and peace.

MECH/FLESH

Science-fiction also explores our attempts to circumvent the flesh, to reject the socio-biological implications that our weaknesses insist upon. As in reality, these films will instill elaborate virtual realities for characters to indulge in so that they may avoid their real-life identity.

Sociologist Sherry Turkle examines the fragmented nature of our acculturation in comparison to the “conditions of postmodern multiple identities...the idea of multiple identities refers to the way people take on different and potentially contradictory identifications at varied times and places.” (Barker, 361) Films like Strange Days and the Matrix take the concept of being able to choose which aspects of your identity you are most comfortable with and allowing you to choose them, all the time. In The Matrix, people who exist under the false pretense of reality as we know it are given the option of remaining before finding out the bleak truth that they are actually living in a construction. Their fundamental choice is to accept all aspects of their existence, of their influences and their selves, or to live in a dream world that offers them a false sense of security.

In Strange Days, there is an underground activity in which you can purchase someone else’s memories and physically experience the sensations of their past. This has the consequences of not only just repeating the same good memories over and over again, never to have another original moment, but also the exploitation of someone else’s history.

Both of these films offer their hypothetical populations an attractive virtual alternative. But as Turkle points out of players and their game-lives, the false reality “merely highlight[s] the limitations and inadequacies of their ‘real life’.”(Barker, 362) Again, we see the Saussurian binaries at work- the quality of real-life and the experience of the flesh creates an essential argument to confront and maintain humanity, even in troubled times.

PREPARATION:PRE/APOCALYPSE

After we’ve controlled our genetics and chemicals with science, after we’ve attempted to replace our reality or simply construct extensions to make it easier, after we’ve exhausted our resources and technology, science-fiction is still capable of showing us what human potential is made of. Post-apocalyptic films set in a future where technologies have been destroyed are an interesting study in how our culture would survive, adapting to the conditions of history while recovering from the future. Although mankind was incapable of preventing its mass self-destruction (always self), something inherent lives on.

‘Day of the Dead’ (1985) addresses a group of scientists and soldiers trapped in an underground military base after a widespread outbreak of zombie plague. After attempting to cure, socialize, and kill the zombie population, it is realized that it is pointless to fight against. The main characters ultimately find their peace when they decide to enjoy what lives they have left building a small community together, nurturing the cooperative instincts that ensured our survival in the first place.

‘The Road’ by Cormac McCarthy simply but gently tells the story of a father and his son trying to find relief from the bleak and barren landscape of cannibals and pillagers. All along the way, the father motivates the son to continue on with the explanation that they are “the good guys” who “carry the fire”. There is nothing else in the world to grasp, and yet the will to survive is expressed as the most worthwhile when honoring the most difficult aspects of humanity, self-sacrifice and compassion.

These modern day depictions of the future, sometimes near, sometimes distant, are useful for analyzing what people today believe about the destiny of our culture. While the post-modern self-reflexivity of these tellings could only mean that we are acknowledging our eventual destruction, I believe it is speaking more to that ingrained sense of indefinable, essential humanity.

Works Cited

Barker, Chris. "Biology And Culture, A New World Disorder?, Issues of Subjectivity and Identity, Digital Media Culture,." Cultural Studies. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2008. Print.

Wilson, Edward O. "Heredity." On Human Nature. Harvard UP, 1978. 15-25. Print.

Blade Runner. Dir. Ridley Scott. Prod. Ridley Scott and Hampton Francher. By Hampton Francher and David Webb Peoples. Perf. Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer, and Sean Young. Warner Bros., 1982.

Children of Men. Dir. Alfonso Cuaron. Perf. Clive Owen and Julianne Moore. Universal Pictures, 2006. DVD.

Equilibrium. Dir. Kurt Wimmer. Perf. Christian Bale and Sean Bean. Dimenson Films, 2002. DVD.

Gattaca. Dir. Andrew Niccol. Perf. Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman. Columbia Pictures, 1997. DVD.

Mad Max. Dir. George Miller. Perf. Mel Gibson. Kennedy Miller Productions, 1979. DVD.

The Matrix. Dir. Andy Wachowski and Larry Wachowski. Perf. Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss. Village Roadshow Pictures, 1999. DVD.

Day of the Dead. Dir. George A. Romero. Perf. Lori Cardille and Terry Alexander. Dead Films Inc., 1985. DVD.

McCarthy, Cormac (2006). The Road. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Strange Days. Dir. Kathryn Bigelow. Perf. Ralph Fiennes and Angela Bassett. Twentieth Century Fox, 1995. DVD.

World of Lifecraft

Our assigned text, "Cultural Studies" by Chris Barker, in the chapter entitled "Digital Media Culture", gives a heartily optimistic view of the potential of the internet. Citing enthusiastic points that the internet will "make us all cultural producers," (pg. 352) and that "a number of writers have hailed the Internet as enabling new forms of activism" (pg. 352). I instead agree with the proposed alternate view that the internet misleads people into believing they have taken action when instead "...The internet...gives rise to the illusion of dissent in the face of actual powerlessness." (pg. 355)

Based on my personal plunge into the world of online gaming, and my first-hand accounts of the vast population that inhabit these fantastical worlds, I think this issue is something that needs to be addressed to a deeper degree if we are to begin deconstructing the culture of the internet. The final sentence of the section "Computer Gaming" quotes Sherry Turkle, a Social Studies professor as warning of "the danger of being lost in cyberspace and mistaking the dream for the real world." (pg. 363) I wish this had been the first sentence of the section. Since going cold turkey on World of Warcraft over a year ago, I still find myself feeling sensations of "homesickness" for the virtual landscapes of the game. It is a wonderfully intricate community, and offers many of the leisurely activities of the real world. Not only that, it is possible to forge many cooperative friendships when teaming up with others to achieve a lucrative goal. I have a hard time convincing myself that the time I spent sitting statuesque, but for the flying of my fingers, is time I should regret wasting. I believe that the virtual world, as a simulation of our real-world culture, is just as capable of teaching us self-identification and acculturation as the real world. I would love to see some more studies exploring the changes in a person's confidence level.

Turkle also describes players "whose game-life has merely highlighted the limitations and inadequacies of their 'real life'." (p. 362) I'm not sure what to make of this. Many of the people who are attracted to these games may not have found solace in anything else the real world has to offer. I think we are fortunate for people who are disabled or seen as physically unfit for 'normal' social interactions to have an opportunity to truly be them'selves' when the fleshly world shuns their inner spirit. However, it is important for these same individuals to take the self-worth they have discovered and apply it to a real-world context, so that they may not always be afraid to make any changes in the world around them. This goes back to the original point that the internet can feel more productive and active than it actually is. This is especially relevant in gaming, where short and long-term goals seem endlessly available in the same small context. In short, as the famous proverb says, "you can't take it with you when you go."

But just in case it turns out the Egyptians have a better idea of life after death, I will fill this blog-y tomb with the relics of my virtual wealth.

Seinfeld Group

I feel fortunate to have been part of a group that had so many hard-working, intelligent people. Because of that, it's hard to say what I may have contributed independent of the team effort. I did assist by taking notes when we had our meetings and typing them out, then e-mailing them to the people who could not make our meetings. I was active in discussing the formatting and content of our discussion, and I participated in constructing the section on modern vs. post-modernism, pulling text from the chapters and connecting it to the show. I broke down the clips and made sure I was familiar with their context in the show so that I could readily navigate them the day of the presentation. A point that I was fascinated by but did not have an opportunity to discuss was Seinfeld's similarity to the other post-modern text we viewed, "Annie Hall". If given the opportunity, I would have discussed their similarity in the way they addressed the foibles of everyday life, the emphasis on Jewish culture in New York City, and the self-reflexive nature of their comedy.

Thanks to my group members, I think our presentation turned out exactly as we hoped.

Halloween, circa the future.

There is no better stage than than Halloween night in West Hollywood to observe the implications of Judith Butler's "Imitation and Gender Insubordination". In this essay, Butler explores the concepts of gender and sexuality through the "performative" aspects of their social construction. By using the concepts of drag to symbolize her arguments, Butler is able to deconstruct the external expressions of gender by defining them not as pre-determined biological or instinctual truths, but as perpetually learned imitation. My observations of last night's sensational and glamorous gathering of all degrees of gender identity is living proof that expression of self cannot be confined to these social constructions.

Walking down Santa Monica Blvd. on October 31st, 2010, I was privy to a spectacular display of painstakingly elaborate clothing and costumes in all manner of expression. There were people dressed as animals, pieces of furniture (a "One Night Stand", to be specific), varying degrees of popular figures, from Thomas Edison holding a kite being struck by lightning to all manner of figures in history, popular media, and category of fiction. Liberally distributed through the crowd were fun-loving men and women defying the gendered conceptions of expression and, as Judith Butler eloquently puts it, "... [constituting] the mundane way in which genders are propriated, theatricalized, worn, and done." The concept of dressing in drag does not seem to imply the desire to be a woman so much as a impersonation of the definition of feminine as female.

In this atmosphere, the men that were dressing as women didn't feel like "others". In fact, they seemed to define the origin. They were celebrated, demanded respect, and were downright beautiful. Although they were dressing in descriptions traditionally reserved for women, they were presenting themselves with the same degree of comfort and confidence as any person abiding by social standards. And no one got hurt. In this carnivalesque environment, on a night when all standards are shed to allow expression of any kind, Judith Butler's provoking question "...how can something operate as an origin if there are no secondary consequences which retrospectively confirm the originality of that origin?" gives us reason to ponder. Because people were being allowed to dress in any manner they saw fit, it was easy to forget there was a way we were all "supposed" to be.

Even though many of these people could be defined as "drag queens", the fact of the matter is many of these people were not dressed to define either gender, any origin. One performance in particular was given by a character named "Prince Poppycock". He wasn't wearing sleek ball gowns or evening dresses, but he was wearing phenomenally elaborate clothing comprised of glitter, sequins, bright colors, and detailed makeup. He gave a thoughtful performance that only emphasized positivity, loving one and all.

In that moment, I felt proud to be a part of this moment in history. Perhaps it will soon be understood that the "negative consequences" of defying these social standards are not biological, but inflictions of anger and hatred from one another.

Love Can Never Be/Exactly Like We Want It To Be

The Mamas & the Papas were a popular band formed in the late 1960's, known for their Billboard hits "Monday, Monday" and "California Dreamin'". They are frequently categorized by music historians under the "sunshine pop" genre, which "originated in California and typified by rich harmony vocals, lush orchestrations, and relentless good cheer." (allmusic.com) Also found under this categorization are groups like the Beach Boys and The Byrds, as well as frequent comparisons to other co-ed harmony groups like Spanky & Our Gang and Peter, Paul, & Mary. But while other typified California bands like the Beach Boys were singing about girls and surfing, and other folk blends like Peter, Paul, & Mary confronted political upheaval, The Mamas & The Papas addressed complex issues of romantic doubt. By subverting the tradition of romance by addressing themes of possession, selfishness, and mistrust while shedding light on the complications of normative monogamy The Mamas & The Papas created a definitively radical sound. I argue that The Mamas & The Papas did not signify the stereotypical 1960's "sunshine pop" optimism, instead heralding the passive cynicism and introspective self-reflexivity of the 1970's "Me decade".

In American media, radical portrayals of romance didn't begin emerging until the 1970's. When the people witnessed the atrocious mistake of Vietnam, the dizzying chaos of president John F. Kennedy's assassination, as well as a rise in the feminist revolution via birth control, the collective consciousness began to take a turn towards cynicism and irony. Ideas of commitment and monogamy began to come into question. As Tamar McDonald's evaluation of radical romance in her book "Romantic Comedy" states, artistic interpretation of romance during this era "is often willing to abandon the emphasis on making sure the couple ends up together regardless of the likelihood, instead striving to interrogate the ideology of romance." (p. 59) McDonald is reflecting on society's collective mistrust in the established systems on the early 1970s, and artistic media's reflection on it. Yet it was early on, in 1965, that The Mamas and the Papas first album, "If You Can Believe Your Eyes and Ears", focused heavily on the tenuous nature of commitment. Lyrics like "I got a feelin' that you're stealin'/all the love I thought I was giving to you," from "Got a Feelin'" express the radical themes established early in their career. While other popular bands of the time were singing "Love, love, love" , The Mamas & The Papas were wondering "Baby are you holding/holding anything but me?" and if "Monday evenin' you would still be here with me"? The Mamas & The Papas rarely sang about successful love. And when they did, it was by covering existing songs like "My Girl", or standards like "Right Somebody to Love", performed as childishly by Michelle Phillips as Shirley Temple, who earlier popularized the tune.

Not only did The Mamas and the Papas completely abandon any emphasis on "making sure the couple ends up together", when they did flirt with the idea, it had to be done through ironic, childishly mocking tones. This is also in keeping with the tone of "cynical apathy" (p. 61) that McDonald believes was spawned by the social upheaval of the 1960's and was represented in the radical romance films of the 1970's.

When discussing the unique radical tone of their music, it is worth noting McDonald's point that "the idea that romance and satisfaction could be opposite values is new to [this genre]". If the idea of opposing romance and satisfaction is a marker of the radicalization of romance, then The Mamas and the Papas can now be put forever in the books as a definitive precursor. Their self-titled second album and third album, "Deliver", mutated the radically romantic themes of unfaithfulness and mistrust into a bitter anger and sadness. The lyrics and tone of these albums are an emotional reaction to the to the painfully unsatisfied attempts at uncertain love from the first album. Their lyrics are heavily peppered throughout their discography with terms like "lie", "cry", "should/shouldn't", "could/couldn't". The Mamas & The Papas have stopped wondering where their lovers have gone and if they'll return and are gleefully chanting "I can't wait/to say goodbye/I can't wait/to make you cry". The heartbreakingly complex "Did you Ever Want to Cry?" speaks from the perspective of a jilted lover resentfully observing her ex-lover being hurt by another woman.



The Mamas and The Papas music focused so entirely on the radically romantic ideas of dissatisfaction in romance and the unlikelihood of love everlasting that it is only logical to assume they were singing from personal experience. Indeed, it is admitted through many personal accounts and documentaries that there was a string of betrayals amongst them. Lead guitarist John Phillips was married to singer Michelle Phillips, but this did not prevent lead guitarist and best friend Denny Doherty from beginning an affair with Michelle. This was also in spite of the romantic longings that lead singer Cass Elliot had for Denny. As the band sang about each other, to each other, through intricate harmonies that relied on cooperation, the self-reference became dizzying. This aspect of their music also contributes to their radical post-modern categorization, because as McDonald says, "the major thematic concerns of the radical romance all derive from issues of self-reflexivity." (McDonald, p. 67) We also read the thoughts of many cultural anthropologists on the subject of post-modernism in the text "Cultural Studies" by Chris Barker. As noted by people like Gergen, Williams, and Giddens, post-modern culture engages in self-reflexivity, "a discourse about experience." (Barker, p. 201) This 'structure of feeling' (Barker, p .200) exhibits "paradox, ambiguity, uncertainty" (Barker p. 341). The heated, short-spanning career of The Mamas and The Papas, coupled with the obsessive themes of distrust and unfaithfulness, accusation and apology, are too prevalent to not be self-referential .



The Mamas and Papas exemplified the self-involved theme of the 1970's 'Me Decade', as also seen in other radical romantic texts of the time like "Annie Hall" (1977). As McDonald notes in her analysis of romantic comedies, "...optimism and the belief in possibility of change have become anachronisms, and that the new decade [the 1970's] demands introspection." (p.61) The Mamas & the Papas certainly did dwell on their own personal woes, expressing them through their music. In 'Creeque Alley', they sing about their group's origins and struggles getting to California, their main chorus nothing that "Nobody's gettin' fat/except Mama Cass." They did not suspend their internal conflicts to address the widespread political issues or civil rights conflicts, like many other folk bands of the era- they spent every ounce of energy obsessing over their own existence. "I Saw Her Again" is a quintessential picture of self-involvement.



Here we get a true idea of the complicated genius The Mamas & The Papas were able to express. "I'm in way over my head/ Now she thinks that I love her/ Because that's what I said/ though I never think of her." Not only does he lie by telling this girl that he loves her, but he disregards his deception: "But what can I do?/I'm lonely too/and it makes me feel so good to know/She'll never leave me." Given the knowledge of the complicated betrayals that occurred amongst the band members, the interlocking harmonies that relied upon one another for expression as they sang about each other, to each other, creates a new dimension of self-reflexivity.

The multiplying mirrored layers of self-reference and frank, painfully honest doubt about the social construction of love and romance sets The Mamas & Papas far from the stage of other bands of their era. But they were able to plant their dark seeds in an uplifting, nostalgically folksy style that catapulted their internal strife up the charts for two short, burning hot years. Though they are remembered as a "sunshine pop" group, their legacy lies in their radical roots.




WORKS CITED
1. Eder, Bruce. "The Mamas & The Papas." AllMusic. 2010. Web. 13 Nov. 2010. .

2. McDonald, Tamar Jeffers. "Romantic Comedy and Genre." Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre. London: Wallflower, 2007. Print.

3. 1. Barker, Chris. "Enter Postmodernism." "Television, Texts, and Audiences." Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2008. Print.

4. Annie Hall. Dir. Woody Allen. Perf. Woody Allen, Diane Keaton. MGM, 1977. DVD.

In Honor of Baudrillard

If the signs are eliminated, what will we make of our reality?

Unlogo Intro from Jeff Crouse on Vimeo.

Taken to the opposite extreme; An overly commercialized product allowing an outside artist, Banksy, to comment on the capitalistic, exploitative nature of mass production.


The Simpsons - Banksy's intro | Flabber

Skin, Sex, Society

The past week of my culture class has allowed me to indulge in some wonderful treats. We watched almost in its entirety the entertainingly radical romance "The Graduate". The following session was spent watching choice scene gems from "10", a mid-life crisis sex comedy. But it is the 1973 novel "Sula" by Toni Morrison that has remained at the back of my mind. It is not just that it coincides with two short stories I also read recently for my English class, "I Stand Here Ironing" (1961) by Tillie Olsen and "Everyday Use" (1973) by Alice Walker. "Sula" remains dangling in my mind because of the way it portrays themes of family conflict with a streak of romantic, loving nostalgia that never betrays the struggles of the people involved.


Toni Morrison (Chloe Wofford: birth name)

Each of these stories is designed around an ideal of feminism. "Use" and "Ironing" tell the story from the perspective of the single mother, reminiscing on the ways they raised their daughters. "Sula" is able to convey the same relationships, but it is told with an unnamed narrative focus. In doing this, author Toni Morrison makes us feel like a citizen of the town of Medallion, Ohio. Bringing the focus outside the head of an individual gives the reader the ability to put the strong female characters described in a greater context. Through this context we understand even more greatly the complicated design of obstacles that each woman must overcome in their own way, and for their own reasons. From Sula's mother, Hannah, sleeping with many men to satisfy a bottomless craving for physical affection to her grandmother who killed her own addicted child, an unforgiving history is conveyed, never condemning but never flinching at the consequences that their female strength required. Morrison gives us the perspective of generations of pain that a singular narrator couldn't.


Tillie Olsen

Each of these stories has their own significant merit to contribute to the world of feminist writing. "Ironing" addresses a similar time period as "Sula", the early 1900's as represented by the lack of work during that time as well as the lack of sympathy for the woman who has to pick up the pieces when the father refuses to remain in a family under those circumstances. "Everyday Use" condenses the generational expanse between mother and daughter similarly seen in "Sula" to explore the differences in black culture as modern society evolved. "Sula" manages to address the reality of both these socialist and black feminisms (Barker, p. 282) without exploiting or caricaturing the gentle reality of the characters.


Alice Walker

What really sets "Sula" apart from the other feminist stories I've read recently is the imagery and setting. Our unnamed narrator says "...it is just as well" that Medallion is getting uprooted for a golf course "since it wasn't a town anyway: just a neighborhood where on quiet days people in valley houses could hear singing sometimes, banjo sometimes, and, if a valley man happened to have business up in those hills- collecting rent or insurance payments- he might see a dark woman in a flowered red dress doing a bit of cakewalk..." (Morrison, p. 4) It is clear from this one sentence that Medallion was indeed a town, and a town that was full of people, culture, sound, and life. In fact, the remainder of the book is spent contradicting that one very statement that it is "just as well". The number of individuals, the specific character of the shops and shop owners, quirky rituals such as 'Suicide Day', and relationships within Medallion that are described in the following pages makes as much of a town as any white Main street. Because of this painstakingly crafted world, "Sula" ceases to be merely a commentary on the woman's struggle, or even the black woman's struggle, instead becoming an elaborate portrait of an entire society of resistance.

I'm grateful to have a curriculum that serendipitously intersects all my readings to one crossroad. Because of "Ironing" and "Use", I feel that I can more competently approach the literary meaning of "Sula". I look forward to further explorations as I continue to delve into Toni Morrison's world.

Ethnography

DISCLAIMER:
This ethnographer approached her surroundings prepared to perceive the interactions that reveal romantic threads between people, at the expense of all the innocent single humans wandering around that infer these observations do not construct the majority. But I can write with confidence that they do construct the behavior of the majority of romantic couples in a natural foods grocery store on a Sunday evening.

WHOLE FOODS MARKET- VENICE, CALIFORNIA
Romance is In the Air

In my observations I made note of various couples' age, dress, conversation rate, ease of smile, and physical closeness. The first portion of my ethnographic activity was located at the lunch tables near the registers. This allowed me a unique look into the behavior of people with each other during money exchanges. Numerous times there were perfectly typical scenarios in which the couples, almost exclusively heterosexual, middle-class fashion, one-third bi-racial, would breeze through the checkout line with well-paced conversation, pay for their bill - equivalent ratio of men and women - and leave smiling with each other. An equal number of couples waited in line silently, seeming to wait out the social obligation that comes with eating nowadays.

I glimpsed a few notable moments of coupledom in passing. There were at least three heterosexual pairs in which the fashions were indistinguishable from each other, uniformly asexual. For example, one in an upturned Polo collared shirt and jeans, the other in a long-sleeved plaid shirt and jeans. In this case the woman had the confident assurance that is usually associated with masculinity, and the man seemed happy to submit to the direction of the woman.

Other couples, ranging anywhere from the ages of early twenties to late fifties, sat in silence, staring into space past each other as they ate, or looking at their phones. These people would leave the table often walking many feet away from each other. There were two couples where the female took up all the time talking, but the man was mono-syllabic and put in minimal effort to maintain appearances. This struck me as an uncanny similarity to Maggie and Brick's relationship in "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof." (1955)

Since this particular grocery store has a wine bar, I thought it would be a shame for me to not determine a few behavioral differences between standing in line versus standing in wine. I was not disappointed to find the differences were marked.

There was one duo in particular that caught my attention. They were in their late fifties to early sixties, and they had their arms around each other the whole time they were picking out a bottle of wine. They were dressed for the evening and staring at each other in a way usually reserved for teenagers.

A conversation began with two strangers sitting nearby. The woman almost immediately dropped the information of her divorce, and though the man was not interested, she kept creeping into his personal space. He was not completely disregarding of her, and they had an interesting conversation about how the modern age will no longer produce the stacks of love letters she recently inherited from her grandparents.

I believe that I chose a good place to observe based on Raymond Williams' suggestion that culture be explored in terms of the "identifications and forms of culture" (Barker, p.45). This cultural marker represents the idea that cultural products and their purposes and forms generate and express meaning. The idea that such a high ratio of couples spend their Saturday evening in a high class grocery store tells me the symbology of the object, food, and their sharing of a meal, oftentimes can represent their union over consumption. I believe that food and alcohol are two of the biggest cultural identifiers in American culture, and targeting them led me to rich and interesting observations.

People behave differently depending on the stage that is set for them. In the wine bar area, people were more apt to open up on a personal level and discuss aspects of culture with strangers in a way they wouldn't with each other or cashiers by the registers. perhaps the couples that were eating outside at the tables would have been more intimate had they been eating over a glass of wine. It is impossible to judge romantic success by observation of conversation, but nonetheless the rate of conversation and intimacy was more frequent over wine despite the physical arrangement being identical. So if we are truly determined by our surroundings, then the arguments of Stuart Hall (Barker, p. 219-220) regarding the "postmodern subject" are spot-on. This movment is described as when "the subject assumes different identities at different times...Within us are contradictory identities, pulling in different directions..."(p. 220) By observing the differences between public behavior at casual lunch tables and an intimate wine bar, the idea that we are constructed by culture is certainly demonstrated by this ethnology.

In my specific observation location, a liberal beach town, the demographic reflects one of the most forward thinking areas of the world in regards to race, sex, gender, and feminism. In particular I was able to recognize postmodern feminism as described by Weedon (Barker, p.224). He argues that "sex and gender are social and cultural constructions that are not reducible to biology". This is known as an "anti-essentialist" stance, a position that defines masculinity and feminity as inessential "universal and eternal categories" (Barker p. 224). When considering these modern ideas against Simone de Beauvoir's radical, critical, attacks against society and women, particularly the "master/slave relationship" (Beauvoir, "The Second Sex": Intro) her ideas can appear harsh and outdated. I observed in these romantic contexts that women's opinions and ideas could be openly expressed and considered. This was not at the expense of the men's voice-I observed them also being perfectly capable of letting go of the stigmas that come with masculinity.

As a superficial example, in the case of the couples that I referred to as having "androgynous fashion", neither bore any negative consequences to the arrangement. In fact, it felt refreshingly healthy in their contexts. Perhaps this is attributed more to their cultural acceptance in their context as opposed to a strong self-identity, but their relationship is nonetheless constructive. As the women didn't feel pressure to go through the pain rituals of beauty, the men weren't concerned with posturing to feather their stamina or virility. They seemed comfortable and loving without posing to conform to a rigid ideal.

But even in couples that honored the traditional formulas of sex and gender were sweet and intimate with each other. The classic chivalry of yesteryear was prevalent in many couples, and a fifty-fifty ratio of these couples were biracial. Considering that biracial or androgynous romance today in other parts of the country would never be openly celebrated for fear of violent ridicule makes this particular observed community remarkable.

I'd like to use these observations to respond to a remark in the text 'Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre' by Tamar Jeffers McDonald- "[Romantic] films do not just reflect reality, they help to create it too...a closer look at what the underlying ideology of the romantic comedy wants to foster in its audiences indicates why film studios go on and on providing fairytales for adults." (p. 17) This ties in with one of the tenants of Althusser's philosophy of social formation via ideology, arguing that a subject does not create its own agency, but is an 'effect' of structures (Barker p.63). I agree that fiction helps shape reality, but I disagree directly with McDonald and indirectly with Althusser that it is the film studio providing the fairytale to the reality. If the fantasy didn't resonate with a genuine part of a person's reality it wouldn't be successful. I believe that it is the audience that hopes, yearns, begs to have their fantasies justified and reinforced by the media they consume.

There was enough observational evidence to suggest that although two people would spend time together, they were not necessarily interested in each other the way a romantic comedy would lead us to believe. Have these couples subscribed to an alternative ideal- perhaps the ideal that love does not exist? In their own realities, I am certain they prove the rule. But what of the couples that exude happiness, intimacy, dare I say, romance? A less happy couple might predict that their love is fleeting, temporary, that soon enough they will tire of each other and find someone else. But this is not what the loving couple wants to believe, and it is not what a romantic film portrays. It is in attempting to live up to the ideal that is created, and it is the ideal that we replicate in our fantasies. Just as we dream our filmic war heroes are noble and well-intentioned, just as the virgin female victims of horror films are the ones to triumphantly survive, and just as the fictional underdogs get that winning punch at the last moment, there is a repeat frequency of recreating idealism in cinema. Ideologies are not created as direct models of reality, but as concentrations of the best aspects of our reality to display as attainable goals. Who's to say the odds of attaining the ideal is common, or easy? For most of us, it's about the journey of attempting.

Supermarket Wedding

WORKS CITED

1. Barker, Chris. "Questions of Culture and Ideology." Cultural Studies Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: SAGE, 2008. Print.

2. Williams, Tennessee. Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. New York: New Directions, 1955. Print.

3. McDonald, Tamar Jeffers. "Romantic Comedy and Genre." Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre. London: Wallflower, 2007. Print.

4. Beauvoir, Simone De. "Intro to Feminism." Introduction. The Second Sex;. New York: Knopf, 1953. Print.

Jerry Maguire

When reading the text 'Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre' (McDonald), I had a lot of fun comparing the recent viewing of the film 'Jerry Maguire' with the typical expectations of the genre "romantic comedy". It was refreshing to know that amidst reading about the potential materialistic, commercialized, recycled and predictable stereotypes of the genre, at least one flick could stand alone as rejecting strict categorization while honoring type.

At first brief glance, 'Jerry Maguire' could be perceived as a masculine movie. After all, it's about football, football stars, and the politics of sports. This aspect allows strong accessibility to what might be considered typical male audiences.


Jerry networking with the sports stars


Jerry being a rock star at the company meeting

When most audiences see a romantic comedy, they expect "stories from the perspective of their female lead character...privileging her within the film as the site of audience identification." (p. 16) The point of view in 'Jerry Maguire' is completely male-oriented. Yet once we're allowed into the actual plot of the movie, it's discovered that the movie is really about is "boy meets, loses, regains girl" (Shumway p. 12), the pinnacle structure in the girl's club genre of rom-coms.

There are other notable romantic comedy staples in 'Jerry Maguire'. In 'Romantic Comedy', the concept of 'meet cute' is explained to be a frequent device in classic romantic comedies like the films of Billy Wilder (p. 12). 'Meet cute' is when the destined couple share a moment upon meeting that symbolically represents their eventual union. Jerry (Tom Cruise) and his love interest, Dorothy (Renee Zellweger), share a moment like this and more so.


Jerry and Dorothy "meeting cute"

Having just met, Jerry and Dorothy join hands with her son and swing him playfully back and forth as they have a casual chat. It is not just that their moment immediately comfortable. 'Jerry Maguire' manages to incorporate the theme of single mothers and the children's incorporation into romantic comedy with one perfectly symbolic moment.

Of course, it is not just the recurrence of rom-com stereotypes that make it a notable film. 'Jerry Maguire' also finds a unique way to use the genre to explore the spectrum of female identity. Both of Jerry's romantic interests represent parts of the "strong woman" spectrum.



Avery Bishop (Kelly Preston) is Jerry's fiance, a fast-paced, career-oriented, sexually aggressive woman who knows what she wants yet won't shed a single tear to sacrifice it.




Dorothy Boyd is the frazzled single mother secretary who pines for Jerry from afar and follows him into a blind alley when he gets fired.

But these first impression descriptions contradict the strengths and weaknesses of their underlying character. Avery is strong-willed and motivated, but it's at the expense of her sensitivity, as seen in the moment when she harshly criticizes Jerry for trusting a man's word over a contract. Jerry absorbs her scorn, and when asked for loyalty, she replies that "...There is a sensitivity thing that some people have. I don't have it."

This sort of strength is misplaced, and seems to denounce all the wonderful traits that are associated with femininity- like caring, nurturing sensitivity. Dorothy, on the other hand, seems to overcompensate with sensitivity, questionably to a self-detriment. She is willing to sacrifice her job to help Jerry Maguire. But this doesn't necessarily make her a passive follower. She was willing to sacrifice her material, earthly possessions, but not the genuine love that breeds mutual caring and nurture. When it came to defending Jerry, like ensuring the representation of football star Rod Tidwell (Cuba Gooding Jr.), she was ready to pounce, defending his potential agency and philosophies vehemently. But she would not stand for being neglected when Jerry became distant and absent from their relationship. This could arguably make Dorothy the "true" modern woman, having it all, emotionally and psychologically, while raising a child by herself.

Children play such a vital part of the plot that it would be a shame not to acknowledge their influence on the world of the film. For me, this aspect conjures Simone de Beauvoir, and her sentiments that "The division of the sexes is a biological fact...The couple is a fundamental unity with its two halves riveted together, and the cleavage of society along the line of sex is impossible. Here is to be found the basic trait of woman: she is the Other in a totality of which the two components are necessary to one another." (Woman as Other, Intro) Here, in 1949, she is unveiling the truth that it would be biologically impossible for woman to escape sexism on an island away from men the way that say, blacks could escape racism by isolating whites without risking extinction. But at its best, the modern rom-com 'Jerry Maguire' was able to create a balanced relationship that took advantage of biological reliance while still being loyal and sensitive to both sexes mutual emotion reliance. Certainly this also upholds the romantic comedy's seeming #1 priority, perpetuation of the species.

Top Ten Ways to Know If You Are a Serial Killer

The human experience consists of two fundamental, inarguable commonalities- those of language and self-consciousness. These are the foundations that contribute to the shaping of our identities. Humans may not be the fastest or strongest creatures on this planet, but it is our cunning social interactions that have elevated our status of dominance. (Well, that and opposable thumbs.) Without the intricate cooperation of analytical ideas we would not have been able to construct the vast civilizations we inhabit today. Language has also given humans the ability to construct the ethics and morals upon which our continued survival rely. According to Chris Barker of Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice, "...without language the very concept of personhood and identity would be unintelligible to us." (pg 218.) But the level of self-awareness that humanity has been gifted with has led to a long-standing and complicated investigation into exactly how we come to construct our interpretation of the self we were born with. When using language, whatever region it is born from, what do we mean when we say "I"? What is the contribution that "I" am making to "myself"? "Am "I" in control of "my" characteristics and values, or is it the civilization and culture "I" was born into that builds "me", without "my" permission?

Barker acknowledges that we have subjectivity in building our self-identities, but the implications are that we would have no basis for creating our selves without comparisons to the society we were born into. This argument is supported by many cultural scientists, including Stuart Hall. Stuart Hall is recognized for his article on 'The Fracturing of Identity', in which he argues that "The subject assumes different identities at different times, identities which are not unified around a coherent 'self'. Within us are contradictory identities, pulling in different directions..." (pg. 220) His arguments go on to suggest that we construct different identities depending on the different aspects of culture offered to us.

There is no better fictional example of these concepts than the character of Patrick Bateman in the novel/film, American Psycho. The film, directed by Mary Harron, based on the novel by Bret Easton Ellis, slices through American culture in the 1980's and provokes essential arguments in regards to its treatment of personal identity during this era. Patrick Bateman, as portrayed by Christian Bale, is a vain and materialistic Wall Street player. He also happens to be an imaginative fantasizer, constructing sexually violent and intricate daydreams in his day-to-day life.

The film opens at lunch time, where he sits with his contemporaries defending Jewish people against their low-spoken insults. With this scene, the film intentionally leads us to believe he has a confident self-identity that he is unafraid to express, even when his "friends" make fun of him for it. When we enter his home, we see it is largely white, blank. As he performs a series of rituals using a myriad of products to preserve an outer image, we begin to get a sense of mere superficiality. He explains that he uses a specific aftershave "...Because alcohol dries your face out, and makes you look older". He says this as though repeating a sales pitch. Even though he has justification for his purchase, it is an echo of the society that sold it to him. When faced with himself in reflections, he begins to be honest about his lack of self. "There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman, some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me- only an entity, something illusory. and though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable, I simply am not there."

I (sic) believe the meaning of the book and film are to focus not on Bateman's identity as a Psycho, but as an American. Western civilization, and especially American civilization, places an immense amount of importance on our ability to define a self-identity. Individuality and free will are the forefront of American ideals. It is this pressure that Bateman is responding to. Because he feels he has no personal identity to speak of, that he is in fact an empty shell, he was forced to create a construction of a self that would be accepted by the individualistic society that surrounds him. If Patrick Bateman is merely a reflection, as the imagery of the film suggests through mirrors, then it is also his psychotic tendencies that were born of 80s American culture.

American media is commonly criticized for being exceptionally violent. The vastness of the pornography industry in America is mind-boggling. When paired with the philosophy of the "me" decade, is it a coincidence that some of the most notorious serial killers were born of the late 70's and early 80's, and almost exclusively American? John Wayne Gacy, Henry Lee Lucas, Richard Ramirez, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Ted Bundy were all active during this era, all were diagnosed as sociopaths, and all expressed the same sentiment of feeling empty, without identity. If the philosophies of Hall and Barker hold water, then the combination of violent and sexual media with an era of selfishness has evidently dangerous consequences.

Stuart Hall's 'fragmentary' argument that we are constructed from various reflections of our society construes 'American Psycho' as a cautionary tale for Western culture. Maybe we are placing so much importance on the individual to create a 'self' that we are neglecting the importance of the community we are drawing our 'selves' from. And although Barker comments that Western culture "is centrally concerned with questions of individual responsibility" (pg. 219), it could be that this is at the expense of a societal responsibility. With all these individuals running around, attempting to create a personal well-being, perhaps we have lost our sense of maintaining the greater good.


Below I have posted excerpts from the final interview of Ted Bundy and the sociological response to his comments. Although they focus more on how media impacts a persons' behavior, I found them relevant to highlight when discussing how the society we are born into shape the identities we create, and act upon.





In the following interview, Richard Ramirez directly responds to the questions posed in 'American Psycho', including "who are you?" and "do you have emotions?"

Fatal Attraction

It was discussed in class that Beth, Anne Archer's character in Fatal Attraction, could be the one who is the  catalyst for the horrific chain of events that play out. It was argued that because she maintained a suffocatingly pristine home and family life, Michael Douglas' character was driven into a passionately raw, albeit dangerous, affair. But the only way I can wrap my head around the idea that Beth is the first domino to fall is to vilify the system she was brought into, the materialistic values of the upper-middle class. It is hard to say that it is Beth herself who is flawed.

But by that rational, societal blame can be displaced for any of the more blatantly amoral characters in the film. Michael Douglas' character, Dan, is a victim of an overworked position- A position that society led him to believe was essential to a lucrative and therefore stable lifestyle. Alex (Glenn Close), is the victim of society's strict guidelines in regards to stabbing people in their own homes. However, it remains my belief that there are personal responsibilities to be held by Dan and even Alex for knowing the risks involved and continuing forward anyway.

The final death scene in the film was used to support many arguments regarding Beth's power struggles with her home and her husband. *SPOILER ALERT* Because she was the one to shoot Alex, there was a lot of discourse concerning her part in the power play of this love triangle. The clip below shows that this wasn't always the creator's intention.



And this is just classic.

My "Female Expendables" List

Sigourney Weaver -> Sylvester Stallone
Milla Jovovich/Uma Thurman -> Jason Statham
Michelle Yeoh -> Jet Li
Pam Grier -> Terry Crews
Cynthia Rothrock ->Dolph Lundgren
Zoe Bell/Sarah Michelle Gellar -> Randy Couture
Jamie Lee Curtis-> Mickey Rourke
Michelle Pfeiffer/Madonna -> Bruce Willis
Linda Hamilton -> Arnold Schwarzenegger
Angelina Jolie/Lori Petty -> Eric Roberts
Lucy Lawless/Daryl Hannah-> Steve Austin
Tia Carrere/Salma Hayek -> David Zayas

As directed by Katheryn Bigelow, because a separate director is exactly what the male version needed.

Maybe not action stars, but honorable mentions for being badasses at life:
-Anjelica Huston, you can just be queen of the set. You don't have to do anything, just ooze your influence over everyone.
-Geena Davis (Between Beetlejuice and The Fly, I just cain't getchoo outta my mind, baybee.)
-Debbie Harry (You punk queen, you.)
-Judy Dench (She already gets to be 'M', people)
-Sharon Stone (Ugh, it's so hard to NOT choose some people... My heart is shaped like the alien hand in Total Recall for this woman.)
-Tina Turner (Her fabulousnessness prevents her from joining a miscellaneous cast.)
-Angela Basset (If Pam Grier weren't already your hero...)
-Juliette Lewis (If I were more convinced you could be action-oriented, instead of just crazy...)
-Hilary Swank (You were a Karate Kid, and for that, you must be respected.)
-Demi Moore
-Lucy Liu
-Karen Allen
-Margot Kidder

...this list is starting to lose its relevance. Good night.