For March 23rd, please read the following:
- Oehlert, Mark. “From Captain America to Wolverine: Cyborgs in Comic Books: Alternative Images of Cybernetic Heroes and Villains” (CR 112-123)
- Pyle, Forest. “Making Cyborgs, Making Humans: Of Terminators and Blade Runners” (CR 124-137).
- Landsberg, Alison. “Prosthetic Memory: Total Recall and Blade Runner” (CR 190-201)
For this week’s blog response, I want you to focus on how any of the concepts brought up within the readings reflect your own experiences (with film, television, advertising, comics or any other popular media). After your readings, do you see films in a different light? How so? Be sure to explain. Can you locate a connection between an issue or problem brought up in the readings and any particular television show or film you’ve seen? Did you agree or disagree with any particular argument made? Why or why not? You don’t have to stick to any of these questions, these are just guides. I’m mostly interested in seeing how you think any of the articles’ arguments or discussions reflect your own experiences with popular culture.
I have never been a big comic book person. Growing up I was always into My Little Ponies, Care Bears, Smurfs, and occasionally played and watched Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Mark Oehlert, “From Captain America to Wolverine” gave an excellent detailed description of how comic books have evolved over time. I completely agree with him about how the current comic book cyborg characters explain why “we” have cyborgian culture. I found it so interesting how during the “Golden Age” of comics had the heroes battling against the Nazis, during the “Marvel Age” science became part of the picture and the heroes began trying to save the world, I guess this is where the TMNT would fit in, and the next 20 years the comic book characters started to have their own personal problems. Oehlert described the time from 1991 to the present, “Cyborg Age” with great detail, to the point that myself, someone who is completely clueless on the subject, could understand. He looks at the cyborg issue having positives and negatives. The cyborg heroes are not covering anything up to look pretty, he looks at them as showing our society’s fears of our present crime, with the cyborgs fighting the real bad guys; he calls this “cyborg justice.” On the negative side, he feels that this also brings along society’s fears in the cyborgs themselves. Oehlert reminded me of “”Would You Still Love Me If I Was a Robot,” because they both talk about how the idea of evil artificial intelligence came about by cinema.
I agreed so much with Alison Landsberg in her article, “Prosthetic Memory.” She explains how people rely so much on our memories to confirm experiences, but memories cannot always be counted on to provide narratives of self-continuity. My favorite type of movie to watch is comedies. When Landsberg talked about prosthetic memories, and how they are implanted memories with unsettling boundaries, I immediately thought of the movie, The Truman Show. This film definitely had a strange relationship between memory, experience, and identity. Truman’s memories from his childhood were all made-up, he did have lived experiences, but his identity was lost. Landsberg’s take on “experiential real” is that it gives people a way to make history a part of their personal memories, even though they were not there. I love this so much, when I go to museums and memorials, like the new World War II in Washington, DC. It helps me find connections to my Grandfather who fought in that war. I could go to these historical places all the time, just to take in history.
“When memories might be separable from lived experience, issues of identity- and upon what identity is constructed take on radical importance.” (195) When Landsberg says how identity can take a turn down a crazy road because of this separation, it made me think of the movie, Premonition with Sandra Bullock. She finds out that her husband was killed in a car crash, then the next day wakes up next to him, and the following day he is dead again; people begin to think she is crazy but it is her having premonitions. In the end she could have had the chance to save her husband but she is too late. Landsberg gives a good point that memories cannot be depended on to offer narratives of self-continuity. I do want to watch more science fiction films to see if I can find any go these connections.
After reading these 3 articles, I would have to say that I can truly think of a lot more ties to my own life and cyber culture then I had in the past. I have never been one that has been to into movies such as the ones talked about in the articles, nor have I ever been into comic books, but I feel like I could respond to these and understand the stand point of the authors. Looking at Oehlert’s piece, I would like to touch upon one part that stood out to me, and though it does not focus on my personal life I see it in our world today more than I feel it had been around before the cyborg age. He stresses the point that comic book cyborgs are taking violence and making it as personal as using it to the extreme of characters ripping ones spine out. It states in the article that one character “Supreme single handedly crushes a rib cage, smashes someone’s arms off, crushes a hand gouges eyes out hits a character in the stomach with force that opponent’s intestines fly out”. This makes kids react to violence in a positive way. They look up to these characters and idolize what they stand for. After I read this article I got to really thinking about if this is why violence has gone up as much as it has in places such as Elementary Schools and such. As seen through Oehlert who feels that “One edge cuts into society’s fears and desires concerning the present level of crime”. (117). I completely agree with that and this is a growing fear that I have especially considering that I am going into the teaching field. After looking at all three of these articles, I can see that this is a main concern that I found after reading this. We make a connection with comics as how we should react, and when children do this, they are using negative influences to advance in the world. Violence and tendency of evil doing is coming up and less positive actions are being used. After the reading I was able to see a tie between cyberculture and comics that had never came into play for me before. When I think of comics, I think of the old school comics that are happy, those that you would receive with the Sunday paper and would have nothing but happy go lucky strips that would show positive antidotes that would make you laugh and you got a smile from. I did not think that there was so much violence included in them.
Forest Pyle’s article made me question a lot about the movies in which I view and again looking at what the children of today are watching. Through all three articles I was able to make a large connection with the effect it has on children. Pyle’s stated that “we make and on occasion, unmake our conceptions of ourselves” (125). Cyborgs are a figure of our imagination, and much of what we want to be or dream of becoming. This is a quote that stuck out to me in this reading, because kids are looking at these different cyborgs and trying to recreate them in their own lifestyles. Movies such as the Terminator and Blade Runner now have a different look to me. I never thought of them as a negative influence. When I watch a movie, I look at the plot and watch a movie that I would enjoy and one that would keep my interest. When I now look back and think about movies that I have seen in school or even those that I let kids that I babysit watch, I am now a bit hesitant, because unfortunately they may be looking at these images through the movies as one that they can role model a for themselves. Odd Girl Out, a lifetime movie starring Alexa Vega that I recently saw, came to mind when thinking of films that relate to these readings and so forth the concepts that I got out of them. This movie was about a young girl who was taunted and teased by many people all on the cyber world. There were emails, blogs, IMs constantly sent to her to the point where she did not know what to do with the constant torture anymore. When I look back on this movie it is so surreal to me that so much damage can truly be done without even making any personal contact. In Alsion Landsberg’s Prosthtic Memory, we see that the division of the real and what is seen in the cinema. She goes into that we sometimes go back and look at what we viewed as something in which we can experience. CR 194 the last paragraph goes into what makes up the “Human being” in cinema. I would have to say that this concept of Kracauer stands out to me, because I feel like so much that is betrayed in the movies today can become a reality. The cyber world is mixing hand in hand with reality and I feel like soon there is the tendency to assume that it might overpower real life interactions. I have to stop and ask myself again, is the real and simulation that is being seen through these films able to honestly be distinguished by its viewers, or are there those out there that are living a life through this world. I know for me personally I get sucked into the cinema and feel like some of the cyber like movies take me into a world that I would never before have imagined. The movie that we watched in the beginning of the semester with Denzel Washington, for instance pulled me into a world that I would never have thought of before and after these readings and the question that you wanted us to examine, I really am taken back on what my notions of reality and simulation that is taken place in the cyber world stand.
The first reading I read was Mark Oehlert’s “From Captain America to Wolverine: Cyborgs in Comic Books: Alternative Images of Cybernetic Heroes and Villains.” This was an unfamiliar reading for me because I have never been into comic books or movies based on comic characters. I actually think I intentionally avoid watching movies with comics, with the acceptation of Superman, Batman, and Hancock, because I have no context for the material. The only reason I have seen Superman and Batman is because they were impossible to get away from in popular culture. I watched Hancock because I was bored, but it turned out to be funny – I don’t even think it’s based on an actual comic book.
One of the interesting points of this reading was that the plots of the comic books were based on what social issues were relevant at the time. For example, during World War II Captain America fought Adolf Hitler and Human Torch fought Nazis. Then “with the dawn of the Cold War, the emphasis of the comic book heroes shifted away from Germany and Japan to Russia and China.” Captain America’s new mission was to fight communism. Another example is that during 1961-1970 comic book heroes, such as the Fantastic Four, were created by environmental hazards, which “was a reflection of the public’s fears concerning radiation in the aftermath of the War.”
After I read this, I started thinking about the social issues of modern day comic book movies and became interested in comparing the differences in plot trends. The first movie I looked up was Hancock (2008), a bio-tech integrator cyborg, “who system cannot be fully removed or explained.” Hancock’s social issue was to fight and prevent violence. The second movie I looked up was Iron Man (2008), a simple controller cyborg who gains powers from a suit. Iron Man’s social issue involved fighting terrorism. The final movie I looked up was Transformers (2007), who are genetic cyborgs that are machines. Transformers’ social issue was to save the world from other genetic cyborgs. The main issues I pulled from these plots were fighting violence, fighting terrorism, and saving the earth from destruction. All of these issues are relevant to today’s social issues, but they are not are obvious as the earlier comic book plots. For example, it would be cool to have comic book movies that go after Osama Bin Laden, fight in Iraq, go after CEO’s in major Ponzi schemes, or fight green house gases. Maybe our society is too sensitive to these issues, or the purpose of these movies is to take our minds off of what’s going on in the world, or maybe we feel it’s the responsibility of non-cyborgs to resolve these problems.
The next reading I read was Forest Pyle “Making Cyborgs, Making Humans: Of Terminators and Blade Runners.” One of the main ideas I pulled from this reading was that “films demonstrate that when we make cyborgs – at least when we make them in movies – we make and; occasionally, unmake our conceptions of ourselves.” After reading this concept, I thought about how cyborgs in popular media reflect conceptions of human’s and society.
One of the themes I observed was that people are afraid of cyborgs taking over civilization and destroy or enslave humans. The Terminator is an example of this. In The Terminator a cyborg is sent back in time to kill the mother of the commander of the human resistance. Throughout the movie, the human barely conquers the cyborg and the point is clear that humans are no match for technology. Although the human conquers the cyborg, it presents a warning to civilization of what’s to come if the curiosity of technology progresses. The other theme I observed was that cyborgs can be helpful to humans and can help fight evil cyborgs that try to take over civilization. An example of this is the movie I Robot. In I Robot a cyborg teams up with a detective to help battle other cyborgs that have been programmed to fight humans. This movie shows that although we’re afraid of the consequences of our technology, there is just as much appreciation of the usefulness it provides.
This reading gave me an idea about a movie plot. It’s about a civilization of cyborgs that decide to make biological beings call humans, and the humans are going to conquer the cyborgs. Patent pending.
The last reading I read was Alison Landsberg’s “Prosthetic Memory: Total Recall and Blade Runner.” The idea of prosthetic memories is fascinating and also frightening. A prosthetic memory “is a memory that does not come from a person’s life experience. [..] These are implanted memories.” It is scary to think that someone could be developing technology that could alter the memories of individuals. One of the movies this reminds me of is The Matrix. In The Matrix, robots take over humans and use their energy to power the robots’ functions. They implant prosthetic memories into the humans so that they think they are living their original lives. To me this concept represents the ultimate oppression and need for power. If this technology existed and got into the wrong hands it could completely screw up civilization. On the other hand, it could be a useful tool for those who have been diagnosed with amnesia. I think the most frightening realization regarding prosthetic memories is that brain washing is an effective non-technological form of implementation. Therefore, the technology is very feasible and could become a reality.
After completing this assignment I couldn’t help but wonder why Arnold Schwarzenegger is in all of these cyborg movies, and I can only conclude that he is a true cyborg. So I don’t really think we humans have to worry about cyborgs taking over the world. Think about it…
Now I must go watch Total Recall.
After reading these three article, I could see a connection with the characters in film and my reactions to the films. For example, this past weekend I saw the movie “The Last House on the Left”. I have always been a fan of scary movies but this movie gave me nightmares. The twisted plot, references to rape, and killing was creepy and overwhelming. As Forest Pyle states, “cinema has a way of leaving the images of certain faces and bodies permanently inscribed in our memories”. The faces of the killers are stuck in my mind and were in my nightmares. I got attached to what was happening in the movie and even though the actors are not actually how they were portrayed, the image of them are in my memory as terrible people. I think that this can be a positive or negative influnence depending upon the movie. But because I am a scary movie fan, I was constantly relating what I read to violence. Within these movies we find “speculations on the borders that separate the human and the non-humans”. When I read this it makes me second guess the movies. Am I just believing what is done in the movie because I am watching it? Would a scenario such as a killing scene in a scary movie be so violent and twisted in real life? Because I am seeing this on a large screen, I believe it and I do not second guess what is happening. I think that is is humanly possible and it is non-human because what I am actually seeing is just a movie.
Now that I have read these articles, I see the movie I saw this past weekend (which I couldn’t even keep my eyes open for for half of it) in a different light. I realized that I have put myself in the person’s shoes who is being treated terribly in the movie. Instead of separating myself from it, I get emotionally attached.
I also see how violence can increase in kids. Another example of a movie would be the most recent Batman. It was filled with violence and Batman is seen as a hero for hurting others. Just like the scary movies, there can be an attachment to what Batman does and he can been seen as a influence on things that kids try to do.
I thought the reading about the prosthetic memory was very interesting. Reading it last was also very helpful because I felt it brought the other two readings together. A prosthetic memory is “memories which do not come from a person’s live experience in any strict sense. There are implanted memories, and the unsettled boundaries between real and simulated ones are frequently accompanied by another disruption:of the human body, its flesh, its subjective autonomy, its difference from both the animal and the technological”. I had to read this definition over multiple times. What I get from this is that it is a memory that the person actually does not experience but it is something that affects you a great deal and could make an impact on your body physically. For example, when I was watching the scary movie this weekend and I was legitamately feeling sick from what I was seeing, which is a prosthetic memory. It isn’t a memory that I actually was a part of, but because I became attached to what was going on in the movie it affected my body physically.
I think that popular culture has more of an affect on people than they can even realize at times. Advertisements attract people to buy certain things all the time, while movies and televisions shows become addicting and people actually feel apart of what is going on. Through these readings I realized how much I attach myself to what movies I watch. It made me think twice about doing that and wonder if I am actually wasting emotions by becoming so attached. It will be interesting to see how I react the next time I watch a scary movie.
Mark Oehlert’s article, “From Captain America to Wolverine: Cyborgs in Comic Books: Alternative Images of Cybernetic Heroes and Villains” has three different categories for the cyborg. The first being the simple controllers which he uses Wolverine from the X-Men as an example that I best comprehended. He states that Wolverine has “his primary cyborg system surgically attached to metal with the option of being removed. The bio-tech integrator on the other hand, can not be removed using Cable as an example. Cable has the ability to “reconfigure parts of his body to either a machine or an organic state”. This category seemed more relatable to people as it has the ability to look “entirely human”. Next, The genetic cyborgs have their primary power from “alteration of their genetic code” such as Spiderman.
The coincidence from all of these cyborgs he discusses is that their primary priority is to fight crime which involves a lot of violence. He notes that violence is a problem in comics. It is no different than seeing Xmen the movie. The characters play a role in fighting against crime and reassuring security with their supernatural powers. However, the violence is what keeps the audience enthused and wanting to see more. Sequels are usually made in movies that entail a lot of action and violence. It is thrilling for viewers and captures their attention because it is different from our ordinary lives, especially when the characters are any of these cyborg characteristics that Oehlert notes.
Before reading his article, I knew that the media uses violence as a source to sell tickets. The media is so used to showing violence along with heroism that it makes young children think violence is ok. Young boys especially look up to these Xmen characters the Oehlert states as their idols. They do not see that the media is different from reality, and believe what they see very easily. Popular culture is influenced by the media which usually uses violence to boost their box office sales.
Forest Pyle’s article notes the movie “The Terminator” as a fight against man versus machine. The focus throughout his article is destruction and the “termination or retirement” of cyborgs. Being that I didn’t see Terminator in a while, I have a vague memory of the ending. Although I don’t remember distinct scenes of the “gestures of the hand” when filming death, I do recognize that it is likely for popular culture. Many of the scenes when characters are near death, there is a focus on the movement of the hand. I can not target a specific movie, but scenes of people releasing their clenched hands are used frequently as a sign of a dramatic death.
Alison Lansberg article quoted similar statements from a woman who viewed the Shrek as her own love interest and felt that she was the princess in the movie. She felt the movie was so realistic that she felt Shrek was actually kissing her. The media also has the power to look at life in a different perspective. Instead of taking into one’s own past experiences, viewers take into consideration the “experience within the movie theatre”. This may encourage them to see things in a new light, take more opportunities, have a more optimistic view.
One of the greatest ways the media has helped me is when I can relate to the characters in the movies. I either relate by being in the same situations using my own personal relationships that have been broken or mended. I can also relate to characters that show the similar personalities or reactions to certain situations. Once I start relating myself to one character, I get so drawn into the movie that I tend to have the same amount of emotions of the characters themselves. By the end of the movie, I either leave the theater feeling optimistic if there was a happy ending or distraught as I replay in my mind how I wanted the final scene to end.
There was once a Korean drama that I could not go a week without watching at least one episode. As weird as this may sound, I would reenact scenes in my mind the way I wanted them to be. The drama was about a typical love story, but in the end the woman died of cancer. There were major fanatics to this particular drama that those who read the book and knew the ending beforehand, disputed to make a happy ending with the woman surviving. There was a huge controversy about this drama because people were so drawn into these characters and emotionally tied so far as to change the storyline.
I have read a few comics possibly in the Sunday newspaper, but even though I love comedy, I normally do not read comics. In Mark Oehlert’s “From Captain America to Wolverine: Cyborgs in Comic Books”, Mark gives a description in great detail about how comic books (pictures, meaning, etc) have really evolved over time. Due to the “Cyborg Age” we are in now, everything else is changing why not the comics. When Oehlert compared different time periods to the comic books it made more since why they evolved so much. I realized after this reading, not because I never knew, just that I never thought about it, just like everything else that has changed due to the time period (such as movies, television) comic books also have changed. I bet if I found a recent comic book, or comic strip, I would see at least one making light about the recent economy/President Obama. I never thought of it this way but Mark Oehlert put into my perspective that comic books are a way of “entertainment” and just like all other forms of entertainment, it develops around what is happening in the real world today. Forest Pyle’s article really made me think about the effect some movies have on children. I was not oblivious by all means to this before, but doing this reading, it made me re think the topic. Movies with “cyborgs” in them might just look like characters to some people, but to others including children it could seem as something completely different, including a role model. If you ask children now who they want to be when they grow up, or who they admire, they will most likely give you an animated character from a movie because they believe that since it was in the movie, life could possibly be like that. Forest Pyle’s article made me think about the actual personal damage some televisions/films could do on a child. I was flipping through the channels yesterday and came across a movie (on a normal channel). This movie was incredibly graphic with many details I as an adult did not want to see/didn’t feel comfortable with. When doing this reading and thinking about the effect on children, I thought about how easy it would have been for a child to come across this film when just flipping through channels, and if this film was on one if its graphic parts, it could incredibly affect a child. One little frame of this movie, even if they only keep it on for one second and it was at a graphic part, in my opinion would not only scare children, but bring a lot of questions up and honestly really affect them in a negative way. This made me re think about the whole way we do entertainment. I believe there most definitely should be a difference in film, some for adults, some for children but even thought there are parental controls available to block out instances like this one, I believe that if there is something out there that could possible scar a child in any way, why make it accessible completely. The idea of parental control is perfect for blocking things out, but say the child is at a friend’s, grandmas, neighbors etc. what is stopping them then. I enjoyed Alison Landsberg’s Prosthtic Memory a lot because it made me re think how I portrayed movies and the difference between real and what we see in the cinema. Since I have been talking about children, even though this is an effect on all ages, I will talk about children. This article going on with the previous article, made me think about how many children believe what they see in a movie is “real”. Children are so good about believing everything they see so why not believe that what is going on in the movie could be “real” in their life. This brings up a large argument because there is no one out there and the movie doesn’t ever state “THIS IS NOT REAL” and without that the child won’t know. I believe that some sort of unreality needs to be in a child’s life but a false sense of everything without being told it is not real could affect a child down the road.
Forest Pyle, unfortunately, lost me as a reader very quickly into his article because uses Paul de Man’s literary criticism technique of deconstruction, which seeing as I recently learned of de Man and deconstruction in my literary criticism class, disheartened me. Deconstruction breaks down a text to the point that one realizes, there is no point, there is nothing, “it upsets rooted ideologies [such as the ideology of humanism] by revealing the mechanics of their workings,” (pg. 126). This might seem a beneficial idea, to break down ideology and human nature to truly understand the meaning, but when one does that, where is the hope? The realization of the world, life, the text become pointless because you soon realize that there is nothing. As my criticism professor iterated, and reiterated, those who tried to complete their degree by doing a dissertation of de Man, failed, and never completed their degree unless they changed who they were doing because de Man is so depressing, amazing, but morbidly depressing.
Through a disgust of having to deal with negative with de Man, the overarching idea I received from Pyle’s article is that we must look at movies not from the enjoyable state in which we watch them, but the underlying meanings-what is being said, the actions, and the text that the movie grew out of from paper to movie screen. I think we all do this when we question or appreciate a movie, regardless of whether or not we enjoy a movie, we always discuss it as well as what the implications from the movie were.
After any movie, I always critique it…everyone does, you either like it, don’t like it, or are undecided, but these opinions are all derived from some aspect of a movie. For example, this past Sunday, I saw the movie, Watchmen, a film created from a comic book, it was a movie I didn’t want to see, but lost in a coin toss with friends as to which movie we’d see. I was bitter about spending $8.25 for a movie I wasn’t interested in; however, once I sat down and watched the movie, I became a critic of the movie not because of previous feelings, but from what the movie made me think and feel. I left the movie feeling undecided, not amazed and not fully disappointed, but rather conscious of what the movie was saying.
Watchmen was derived from the comics, which Mark Oehlert discusses within his piece about how the comics represent a trend of where people have thought technology was going, their anticipations as well as their fears. A striking point Oehlert made was in the statement “the issue of humanity with comic book cyborgs then, s not if the machine will take over the human side of the equation, but what will the human half choose to do with his new abilities,” (p.119) this point was one that became obvious through Watchmen (as well as the concept of killing a few to save the masses, and that humans are good and bad).
The human side of this whole discussion, debate, or whatever one may like to call it is what always intrigues me. I enjoy films, and I enjoyed this week’s readings because they further enhanced my way of thinking about things I read and watch because they went along with my preconceived ideas about movies as well as my curiosities. I believe all 3 of the readings hit home on some basis or another with me because they just stated some of my common thoughts; however, they were more scholarly than I about it and most likely worded my thoughts better than I could.
My overall summary:
1) Oehlert- Regardless of whether or not comics and movies become real, humans are real. Humans are what can create or destroy these ideas we think up, and sometimes fear; however, our main fear should be of humans. Humans have thought, emotion, and the power to decisions—depending on the person and their abilities, our world could be changed for the better or the worse. We’ve already seen examples of this, Hitler and Mussolini are widely historically known examples of the negative, but what about the creators of the A-bomb? They were trying to stop a war, their brains were amazing, but now after the A-bomb stopped a world war…it has fueled another war…Medicines were created to save lives, but then industries were created to create the medicines-industries that care about money and limit the abilities of some to receive medicines, causing death. Everything is a 2 sided coin-the good and the bad, humans are the ones who can make the world great or destroy it…
2) Pyle-People need to break down what they are seeing and reading to understand the meaning, to dissect the meat of text, and come to a realization about the world-the truths and lies we have brainwashed ourselves in…to realize that there’s nothing. No point.
3) Landsberg- Which memories are real and which are fake? Do parts of our bodies carry within their cells the memories of their owner? What happens when we create memories, or play with memories? One’s own history should not be taken likely.
^Judy A.
I’ve never been big into comics growing up, I would always take my brothers comic cards and super hero cards just to set them off, but I was never into them myself. After reading “from captain america to wolverine” by Mark Oehlert I agree with him that science plays a huge role in creating heros such as in Fantastic four, Spider man, and other super heros. Many of the heros in the comics work independtly, but there are also many that work as a team such as the Fantastic Four and X-Men, have common origins and usually operate as a group. Some superheroes, especially those introduced in the 1940s, work with a young sidekick for example Batman and Robin, and Captain America and Bucky. This has become less common since more sophisticated writing and older audiences have lessened the need for characters who appeal more to child readers.
“The Terminators and Blade Runners” by Forest Pyle was extremly interesting to me because it explains how Cinema has mad a lasting impression of images in peoples heads. When they say that they can perminatly set an image im someones memory I feel like it’s true because if you think back to when you were younger, or even still today there are so many images that sick in your heads from movies. For me an image that I always remember is the titanic when they’re standing at the edge of the boat and he has his arms on her’s and it’s almost like they’re flying in the wind.
After reading the “Prosthetic Memory” by Alison Landsberg I think that this concept is amazing, but at the same time a little scary. The idea that someone could be making technology that can alter you memories is really freaky. I agree that people rely on our memories to confrim expirences that we’ve had and our expirences. In a way I think reading about this can open a lot of people eyes about what our memory can actually do for us. If you lose your memory you lose your expirences that you’ve gone thru in life, and having to start all over again with no memory or expirences would be a hard thing to handle.
After reading these articles it makes me think about movies that I’ve watched in the past. It makes me wonder if these movies and tv shows I watch if I were to put myself in the actress’s shoes what would it be like. I tend to get really attached and into chick flicks, because I always relate them to my life and whats going on in my life at that time. Since I relate them to my life so easily I always tend to love the movies. Especailly when I can relate to the actress and the situation they’re in such as in relationships and problems that go on it get’s me attached to the movie.
~Latasha Rivers
During the reading of “From Captain America to Wolverine” it really shed some light on how comics evolved over the years. I really wasn’t a big fan of reading comics or watching cartoons while growing up but once movies started to be made it really grabbed my attention. It is hard for me to compare the way superheroes are portrayed in comics vs. the movies but from the movie stand point I agree with the author when he states “The more violent they are the better I like them! The better they sell too.” I think that action is what drives the consumer to want to read or watch more. For example, I enjoy watching Spiderman, X-men, and Hulk(second one) compared to watching Fantastic Four, Hulk(first one), and Elektra. To me each comic has a purpose and depending on the scientific defect that went wrong within them drives my attention. This also kind of challenges my sense to what’s real and what’s not. I didn’t think that comic book heroes dealt with everyday problems oppose to what we deal with on a day to day basis as well. It also challenges my thought as to these new advances that scientist or doctors are using now and for the near future and what if something does go bad would we be infected with this new ability to fight off villains, or regurgitate, and maybe even have magnetic claws come out of our hands. In so many ways it does challenges my intent and makes me afraid to get hurt to where I have to undergo surgery or anything of that nature. A movie that portrays action immediately draws people into the popular culture media that we then become easily brainwashed.
It seems to me that as the future comes the superheroes become more real and have real life capabilities that makes it almost possible for us to question what we happen if that happened to us this one time or would we have any remembrance in regards to the situation. After asking this question it started to make me think of the movie Hancock where he had no remembrance and he thought he was alone in the world and didn’t know who he was before the accident. This reminded me of Lansberg prosthetic memory where memories are implanted from what we are told and not through our life experiences before then. Along with Hancock you can include the Matrix and Wanted where the leader makes you believe one thing but in reality its actually a different story.
One of the biggest themes that has flown out at me, when it comes to comics, has always been the characters’ actions. A long time ago I decided to believe that it isn’t what someone says, but what they do, that is the more “true” indicator of the inner quality or the “real” nature of the self. Understanding the different types of cyborg superheroes was a sort of thing that I was aware of in a lesser-aware, or deeper mental “sense” or “location”, but never something that was immediately visible upon first glance. I’ve always been fascinated by the superhero persona, as in the beginning of the comic world, our superheroes were completely undisputable in their character quality; they were absolute paragons of goodness, justice, and morality.
As comics have evolved, the characters have become more and more complex and less predictable, such as the case of “Watchmen”, where we have superheroes who are actually very corrupt, insane, or unpredictable in their actions; such as shooting an impregnated Vietnamese girl, or planning to murder millions of innocents for “the greater good”. Media is exploring these kinds of archetypes and philosophies, in my opinion, in the interest of either more clearly defining or actually “deconstructing” certain ideas or distinctions; between the “accepted” and the “other”, the humans and the cyborgs, the good and the evil.
It raises the questions of the nature of a dichotomy; can either side survive without the other? Are they defined by each other, in their mutual opposition? Or do they need to be destroyed, in order for us to salvage the legitimacy of one side, as it might be said has been suggested by Baudrillard?
The relationships inherent within this philosophical dichotomy are further explained in the other two readings, specifically regarding “real” and prosthetic identity and empathy.
Holding to my aforementioned personal belief, I believe that the actions are more valuable than the words, especially when seeing so many movies of a person, existentially struggling, decides to take control of their life, deciding who they want to be and how they want to live their lives. It is revealed in those kinds of movies that it really doesn’t matter who the person was before, but who they decide to be in the moment of conflict; the proverbial “I know who I am” that finally reconstructs the person’s individual human identity.
It speaks to me on a human level, as I am searching for this ever-shifting sense of identity, I have learned that essentially, my identity is whatever I want it to be. But for me, unlike Arnold Schwarzenegger, that doesn’t end it. For Arnold in “Total Recall”, he decides who he is, that’s it, the credits roll. But there are no credits to roll in human experience. My identity is not “OK” or “whole” simply because I want it to be. Despite the impact that movies can, and do have, in “prosthetically implanting” experiences into our brains, I still have to work at it, keep changing, and keep working. Human experience, it seems, can only be nudged by our media, not shaped by it. I have no idea where I am going, or where I want to be, or where I will be. I can only try to keep changing with the tides of our society. Because like these characters, I am on that quest. Like Decker, I have to decide the impact that implanted memories have upon me. Like Decker, like Arnold, like Rachel, my choices decide who I am, not the past.
I must say that I enjoyed the readings for this week, they were really interesting. Since I was a kid I’ve always been into cartoons and especially superhero cartoons. I used to watch them all the time after school and on Saturday mornings, that was before we got cable and I found out about Cartoon Network where I could watch them all day and night. I think it was mostly my older male cousins that got me into watching the ‘boy geared’ action and super hero cartoons such as “Batman”, “Superman”, “Justice League”, “Iron Man”, “X-Men”, “Transformers”, “Thunder Cats”, “Conan the Barbarian”, “Spider Man”, “Fantastic Four”, “Power Rangers”, etc. just to name a few. I loved watching all of these cartoons and the old “Batman” and “Superman” movies as a kid. As a teenager and adult when they started turning all of these comics and cartoons into movies and re-made the old movies to better ‘AWE’ my generation, I was like WOW, and went to see every one of them that was made. I think the comic books that the cartoons and movies are based on were a little before my time, or lacked my interest in reading them. I was more interested in watching the action instead of trying to imagine it happening, which is what you do when you read the stories in the comics. But then again, my generation is known for being ‘dumbed down’ and ‘lazy’.
Everyone described me as a ‘tom boy’ when I was little, and all I hung around with was my dad and my male cousins, so maybe this did impact the genre of my entertainment choices. I didn’t really watch ‘girl geared’ shows or cartoons when I was little because I found them boring or just non-entertaining for me, where as my sister did. When I was little we had two TV’s, one in my mom’s room which was off limits, and one in the living room, which my sister and I would always fight over what shows we wanted to watch. I wanted to watch the action/hero cartoons, while she wanted to watch something else. It got to a point where my mom gave us each TV times to watch what we wanted. The funny thing about that now, is that as an adult and as the cartoons and comics have become movies, my sister has gone with me and my brother-in-law to go see the movies and has been all into them. I think because of its ‘realistic’ life-like appeal in the movies as oppose to the cartoon has made them more entertaining or better able to relate to, where as the cartoons and comics did not have this affect. It’s funny, because for people who never watched the cartoons or read the comics, they didn’t really get everything that went on in the ‘real life’ movies at first, like my sister, and had to have some of what went on in the movie explained to them, because they did not have the background information of why/what/who/how something is the way it is.
I don’t think I can really relate anything from the cartoons or comics to real life or have ever tried to act upon what I saw because I knew that it was fantasy and was not real. Of course as kids you play out the roles of your favorite super heroes, which I did all the time, but never related it to any ‘real life’ situations. Some people say that these comics and cartoons may have inspired them to do things that they otherwise would not have, but I can’t really say that. None of these comics or cartoons gave me any extra strength or courage in real life, but it did give me the ability to wish and hope. In the comics and cartoons the ‘good guys’ always won the fight or battle, I kind of wanted to believe that in ‘real’ life this was also possible, that the good would always conquer evil, but as I got older this quickly faded and reality set in and I learned that not always do the good prosper and that bad things will happen that you will have no control over.
After this weeks reading I can’t really say that I see films in a different light. They are simply a form of media for our entertainment. But I can say that after reading “From Captain America to Wolverine”, I began to see how comics and the ‘action hero’ has evolved over the years and become what it is today. Today in the movies and even some of the newer cartoons and comics, super heroes are being portrayed in a more violent manner than they used to be in the older cartoons and original comics. I guess that’s just time and evolution that have had an impact on them. Just as our society has become more violent and discourteous and thirst for violence in entertainment has grown, it is hard and probably inconceivable for our movies not to be violent. Although the hero is still the ‘good guy’ and the HERO, he/she still takes violent measures to subdue to enemy. This is entertaining for our generation. If action movies lacked the amount of violence and ‘action’ they have then it would no longer be entertaining and would not sell, and that is the bottom line, what will sell…
Personally I love action movies and horror movies with all the violence and the ‘blood and guts’ stuff. It is entertaining for me because it allows me, if even for just a moment, to take a step out of reality and experience something mind boggling and thrilling that I otherwise would not. I agree with Mark in his article when he states that, “The more violent they are the better I like them! The better they sell too.” This statement describes our entertainment industry in a nut shell. The consumers are what drive the entertainment market, and let’s face it, people get bored quickly, so we are always looking for new things and new extremes of entertainment to satisfy our thirst for new and thrilling excitements, which the entertainment business caters to and sells to us over and over and over again. How many times has “Batman” and “Superman” been remade to suit the current targeted generation? How many times will they among other super hero movies continue to be remade?
Now although some people have no concept of the line between fantasy and reality and sometimes intertwine both, acting out fantasy in real life and sometimes having major consequences for doing so, we as whole have no concern for these few people and still crave more of the fantasy for our own personal pleasures and entertainment. And as long as there is money to be made off of this need, this will always be the case, will always be our reality. So what if people act out what they’ve seen in movies, until it affects ‘US’ personally it is non-real or of any true concern really. Yes this issue has been talked about and debated along with violence in video games, but the truth is if it were such a major concern or problem for the masses, then we would see a change in our entertainment and ultimately see the violence taken out, but has this happened yet? NO, and it wont; at least not any time soon anyway.
Like most products of American culture, I grew up with what cannot merely be described as an affinity, but rather as an attachment to pop culture. I experienced films as technologically grave as Terminator and Robocop as a child, but was admittedly relieved when Saturday morning came around and Captain Planet convinced me that I can save the world just by recycling (the power is MINE! Apparently.). Whether with Ghostbusters or Honey I Shrunk the Kids, The Matrix or V for Vendetta, my adolescence and beyond has been filled with messages of good versus evil, human versus machine, us versus them.
As thrilled as I would be to analyze the significance and consequences of every pivotal scene in each of these pop culture icons, I cannot help but stall this endeavor to ponder on one question regarding our fascination with the parallel universe that our (pop culture) fantasies create: WHY?
Why do we indulge ourselves with such fantastical visions and such skewed exaggerations not just of what isn’t real, but what isn’t humanly possible? Moreover, why are we bombarded with these messages through popular media as early as our memories can allow us? Above all else, why do we so severely deny humankind the ability and faith to fend off all of these powerful antagonists itself? What causes this void, this inherent doubt in our own abilities, and why do we try to fill it with man-made fictional illusions of heroic proportions?
While I will soon address this void, let us first examine the repercussions of the previous inquiry. If there exists a need as desperate as we depict for superheroes, magical powers, and miraculous abilities to save humankind again and again in our fantasies, how does this eventually impact the human condition in reality? The suggestion of this need alone dictates powerful, unspoken words: humans are not enough. Our abilities will not suffice to salvage our existence.
From what conflict? According to Mark Oehlert, these conflicts are a “reflection of the public’s fears,” alluding to either the destruction or nonexistence of humanity (113). In a sense, through this fear we are constantly at odds with technological manifestations of our own mortality. But can the relief of our fears truly come by relying on fantastical antitheses while implicitly doubting the abilities we really do have (and thus perhaps even further empowering or enabling the superiority of technology)?
Thus begins a vicious cycle in which doubts about human ability create needs for machines, and needs for machines create doubts about human ability. But what of the human psyche in the midst of this cycle? If we are conditioned to doubt ourselves from the beginning of our lives through the most seemingly innocent (yet superior) pop culture characters, imagine the inherent dissuasion for thought that each one of us could subconsciously acquire. Furthermore, if it is humanly impossible to reach the standards of our fantasies (which are presented to us as the only way) to conquer the fear that follows us, are we not automatically deeming ourselves to fail in our most ambitious endeavors for human progression?
By enslaving ourselves to a technological superior from our childhood, we are plaguing and severely limiting our existence to lives of thoughtless, mindless discontent; or in other words, the precise state of our current materialistic nation.
As such, this lifelong conditioning creates a massive void within us; a void that cannot be filled with material goods, nor with the fantastical illusions that the void since childhood has thrived upon and widened from. Weakening the human condition while strengthening (conditioning) the imagination, this disillusionment of work to power, needs to wants, give to take, is only furthering the gap between the already disconnected psyche.
To believe in our sense of fantasy over our sense of reality; to surrender our mind to fantastical notions that defy the mind are to abandon the very foundations of our existence; to submit to science as the dominant source of creation (113).
We are tragically bound to never realize that we are the creators of the very condition that overpowers us; we are the creators of the void. We are tragically bound to never realize that the void could at once be filled if only we could realize the Creator of us.
The readings of this week truly engaged me as a reader, and interested me as a film viewer. All three articles addressed similar, yet different arguments- all of which are pertinent to understanding cyborg films.
While Forest Pyle’s “Making Cyborgs, Making Humans” was a little “wordy” for me to really grasp every detail, I did understand his overarching argument. He states that, “Blade Runner and the Terminator series not only reflect upon the threats to humanity posed by unchecked technological developments, they raise even more probing questions about the consequences of our definition of the human. These films demonstrate that when we make cyborgs… we make and, on occasion, unmake our conceptions of ourselves.” I found this statement extremely interesting, having seen these films. Pyle is basically explaining that cyborg films really make us question humanity, and what it means to be human. What unique characteristic does a human have that a cyborg might not?
Allison Landsberg’s article “Prosthetic Memory” contradicts the typical understanding of unique traits of humans. We, typically, understand humans to have emotion and feeling as a unique characteristic. But, in the films Total Recall and Blade Runner, it is not emotion that is unique- but rather the trait of memory. But this is where it gets sticky because how do we really know if we have experiences a memory, or just simply have the memory of the experience? The cyborgs in the film Blade Runner have been implanted with memories that they think they have experienced. On the contrary; however, these memories have never actually happened in their lives. Landsberg explains that we might revise the prior statement of “A man is defined by his actions, not his memories”. Lansberg states that, “We might revise his statement to say that a man is defined by his actions, but whether those actions are made possible by prosthetic memories or memories based on lived experiences make little difference.” She is basically explaining that whether a memory actually happened or not, the person (or cyborg) still has the memory, and truly believes it to have been a lived experience. So what does it matter if it really happened or not?
But these questions get me thinking- how do I know that my memories of experiences actually happened, and I actually lived through them. Maybe they are prosthetic or fabricated? I have many memories of when I was younger- very vivid memories. But I was so young, so how do I know if I have made these up, or if they really happened? Landsberg explains that, “Ultimately the film makes us call into question our own relationship to memory, and to recognize the way in which we always assume that our memories are real.” It is true- I have really begun to question that validity of my memories. In the same article, a number of tests were done by numerous different people to study the relationship of the cinema to the experiences of the viewer. It was uncovered that people can sometimes think of cinematic experiences as memories of their own.
This brought to mind a recent experience that I had. Just last week, I went to the movie theater to go see the new thriller, “The Last House on the Left”. There is a very intense rape scene- unlike anything I had ever seen before. And I was absolutely sickened by this. I felt almost like this was happening to me- to the point of almost getting sick. Throughout the remainder of the movie, any time the perpetrators face was shown, I became angry, sick, and enraged. I left the movie still feeling as though this had happened to me. The entire car ride home, I could not stop talking about how angry I was. While it was just a movie, I felt like it was an experience and memory of my own- it had that huge of an effect on me. And on a smaller scale, there have been many times where I am having a conversation with someone, and I explain a situated that once happened to me (usually when I was younger). And it is not until far into the story that I realize this was not an experience I had, it was an experienced that I watched in a movie. There have even been some embarrassing moments where friends have called me out and said “no… I saw that movie too”. Oops!
But it really gets me thinking- if it is possible to be so sure cinematic adventures are my own memories and experiences, how much of my memory is actually authentic? According to Landsberg, it wouldn’t matter whether it was authentic or prosthetic, but it still bothers me and gets me thinking.
One last point I would like to bring up is in Mark Oehlert’s article “From Captain America to Wolverine”. While it is not a personal experience I have had, I do hear about such things quite often. This article goes into depth explaining the different kinds of cyborgs, how they have evolved, what their primary objective tends to be, etc. The most interesting point that I read, however, is when he talks about bio-tech integrator cyborgs. In these specific cyborgs, they are stuck with their system forever- it can never be removed. A specific character, Cable, is explained as one of these types of cyborgs. His system can be altered at the molecular level, rather than just popping out claws (as in the simple controller cyborgs). The most interesting part of all of this was how Cable chooses to have some part of him machine at all times. His answer to the question “why?” is simply “to get where you want to go… it never hurts to remember where you’ve been”. His relationship to the machine within his is an emotional one. The machine and human exist as one being. This reminds me of those who have prosthetic limbs. While this has not happened to me directly, I hear about such things happening all the time. Someone may have lost their arm, and now have a prosthetic- but they regard the prosthetic as though it were real. Eventually, the prosthetic limb becomes part of them, and the prosthetic and human function as one being.
I really enjoyed the three readings for this week because it really got me thinking about myself, my memories, my body, etc. From now one, anytime I remember something vividly, especially from my childhood, I’m going to be second-guessing whether it really happened or not.
The first reading that was assigned “From Captain America to Wolverine” was easier to read than other readings but not completely in my field of interest. This has to do with the fact that I have never ever read a single comic book in my entire life. I feel that when I am watching movies that have originated from comics, or books or whatever that I am able to experience the movie version. To be honest I do not read comics I have seen comics but have not gotten into reading them. I was more interested in other topics and had different interest than the typical comic book. In addition, I have watched movies that are reproduction of readings such as: X-men, Batmen, Superman, Spiderman, Fantastic Four, and so forth. I have had some friends’ say the movies are just as good as the comics and even better due to the graphics and special effects. For all of these movies a majority of the super heroes were formed from some kind of science experiment or dealing with science theme. Yes, these superheroes usually are fighting villains and the “bad guys” instead of trying to defend the United States and but the world. This reading kind of made me look at these films differently because they are not focusing on real life situations but are dealing with superheroes and unreal happenings. Why don’t they focus on reality and dealing with real life situations, for example communism? I never noticed either how these superheroes usually have a personal problem that they are trying to face in addition. I never really noticed their personal problems or thought much of it I was more focused on their super abilities and what was happening or what they were trying to save.
The second reading “Making Cyborgs, Making Humans” dealt with terminators and blade runners. I have never seen the movie Blade Runner I have seen a Terminator movie before but was not too interested in watching it. This might be due to the fact that machines, humans and war are not my top kind of movie to watch or that I was just younger and did not understand it. The mixing of humans and nonhumans is a theme in many movies to this day. In the movie Terminator I you are able to see the interaction with machines/technology and humans. The Terminator seemed like more of a boy film or a film that a person with interest with machinery, weapons and fighting would enjoy. I feel that the Terminator is dealing with its mechanized world and just humans fighting machines.
According to Mark Oehlert chidrens characters and adult characters are preceived the way they want them to be in movies and other entertainment. I totally agree with this in childrens movies and comic books the characters are innocent and calm. You also have a bad character who is captured by the good guy (hero). Children want to be these characters and play games acting like them. These characters teaches children to behave and not be bad. Bad people will be punish and the good will be rewarded. You see these in childrens programs on how a bad child or character is capture and punished by the good guy. You want to be the good person because people like the hero.In adult characters there are lots of violence and evil running through comic books , videos and games. There death among the human race and aliens are killing and over taking the world. There are also heros and villans. heros are capturing the villans and punishing them.Comic books according to mark oehlert can be trace back to the 1930′s. The comic book we all love was superman and it was made in 1938 after that it became a popular item in children toys and tv shows. In war times new action figures are made up for example captain america and the villian was the nazi. People were shown that good can overcome evil. Science is also a key factor in making new videos and characters like in spiderman how the boy was transform into a spider and attack the villian with multiple arms. This called the cyborg age where the present is brought in to the character lifes. The later day cyborgs are they going to represent us and be evil and try to overcome the human race. there was a movie with will smith in it , it was called i think robot or somehting like that. where there are evil present and good to overcome. just because there is a robot not all times is it going to be bad. it represents what is going to happenin the future on how we are becoming more advance in the science fill. How in stem cell research we might be able to create a new organ and other things like skin.new designs in buildings were made.Artists were then design artwork of future things and people. Every year a new design of clothing is made up to to represent the future. a product was made called the moon bounce shoes for kids to stimulate walking on the moon.new technology for the wounded soldiers is being made to look like new arms and legs that the have lost. We are also developing clonning , clonning i dont think we should clon a human but maybe new body parts such as organs are good ideas. In the movie total recall is a awesome movie that i use to watch on they lived on another planet and had a community. the guy was remembering information from a pass life and how the bad people destroyed it. there were aliens and other creatures that lived among them. mario brothers was another movie where there was life other than humans and there were slime and other neat creatures like dragons. is there more than us on this planet or in other planets. i STILL DONT believe this but maybe there is.
These readings really opened my mind to how movies have different underlying messages and relations to current events. I would also like to add that Oehlert, Mark. “From Captain America to Wolverine: Cyborgs in Comic Books: Alternative Images of Cybernetic Heroes and Villains” was my favorite reading so far this semester. The distinction between the three different types of cyborgs really helped me learn the fundamentals of cyborgism in comic book entertainment. Some of the underlying messages that I would like to address are; the relation of different superheroes to current events upon their creation and the relation to these concepts to our current events. One of my favorite superhero movies of the past 10 years is Iron man. I believe this is because they did a great job incorporating our fear of terrorism in the main plot of the story. This is the difference between many of the superhero movies that have been released recently; some do a great job in this category and others a poor job relating the story line to current events. The reason for major success in the early years of comic books was in this relationship. For example back in the 1940’s during world war two, super heroes such as captain America and the Human Torch battled against Hitler and the Nazis. Later on in history Captain America became “Captain America….Commie Smasher” during the red scare. “While Captain America was fighting Soviet efforts, Marvel created a Chinese communist villain, known as the Yellow Claw, who dabbled in magic and had created a potion which would extend his life.” These examples really help the story line by incorporating people’s fears into the stories. A few movies that I believe did not do a good job relating to current events were Daredevil and the Hulk. Both movies did a horrible job in this category and did not compare to movies such as iron man and spider man simply because it is in a way unbelievable. Spider man did a great job of relating new age technology in the case of “the Green Goblin” as a simple controller cyborg which is very believable in this technologically advanced culture which added to the movies great success. It’s funny how back in the new age of comic books many of the themes and concepts seemed very futuristic and mythological and pretty unbelievable close to impossible but still had success. In this day in age most popular movies contain concepts that seem fairly believable, which correlates to their success. For example the Matrix did a great job portraying a absolutely crazy concept that in this day in age could seem to be very real, which really helped the success of the movie.
One of the main concepts in Forest Pyle’s Making Cyborgs, Making Humans of terminators and blade runners is that in futuristic cyborg movies create a friendly relationship between cyborgs and humans. In this reading the author states that “And certainly one measure of the massive popular success of the Terminator series is the effectiveness of its recuperations of the tensions and instabilities the films generate: their ability to recover an ‘entertainment’ by restoring the oppositions between human and machine that have been threatened.” I agree with this statement and think its very unrealistic how these movies play on our fear of cyborgs and create a utopian view of this situation. For example in many movies such as terminator, transformers, Robocop, etc we get a view of cyborgs that come from different planets that have interest in helping mankind and saving our livelihood. Humans love this type of stuff because they are afraid of cyborgs from different places and Hollywood portrays them as nice, helping, and concerned for the human race. Realistically if we get attacked by cyborgs from a different planet we will all die and know one from another planet will save us.
Im not a huge comic book fan but I know my stuff so it really surprised me when I read the first reading and realized that I hadn’t noticed the progression he talks about. Then once I had I actually could very much so relate what he is saying. I actually do believe that our “Cyborg age” is in full swing. Everything our “heroes” do now involves computers and making them work for you. Although it applies more to the second reading the show “knight rider” comes to mind. Would we call the car a cyborg? It talks it has intelligence but it is operated by humans…all of the things make me wonder about where we are headed. Another point for me is in the movie “I. robot” the main issue to me was not that the robots were taking over but that part where the robot saved the man instead of the child. The only way for a robot to be able to make these decisions would be if we program our “personalities” into it and then what would that make us? How do we tell in these movies and basically all of popular culture which robots are good and which are bad? In a lot of them they are interchangeable and in some there are even the ones that are doing bad things for the good of us. This is where I feel our society is… right in the middle of a love hate relationship with technology
After the great cyborg apocalypse will we be hailed as the creators or as the enemy the cyborgs had to overcome?
I think everyone knows about characters such as Wolverine, Spider Man, and the Hulk even if one is not really into the whole comic book scene. I know I am not that much into it, but i recognize these characters from my childhood as well as presently since many smash hit movies have been made based around these characters. It was interesting reading Oehlert’s “From Captain America to Wolverine: Cyborgs in Comic Books: Alternative Images of Cybernetic Heroes and Villains.” I hadn’t realized before where the idea of these super heroes came from and I didn’t realize it started back in the 1930s. Apparently, Captain America was created in World War II times as a cyborg hero whose main enemy was Hitler. Then there was wolverine whose arch nemesis was Omega Red, a creation of the old soviet union. The reading also categorized the different superheroes into three different categories; The simple controller, The bio-tech integrator, and Genetic cyborgs based on the characteristics of their genetic and physical make up. The reading also brings up a good point about how these fictional characters have influenced our perception of what cyborgs may be like. After reading the facts about some of these comic book characters, I see them in a bit of a different light now. For example, Captain America, arguably the first ‘official cyborg,’ is (or was) a symbol of hope against a an enemy that existed in real life as well as within the context of the comics.
The affects that cinema has on people perceptions is a theme continually discussed throughout the readings. It is basically the theme since the readings discuss how fictional characters are portrayed and create perceptions. Forest Pyle’s article has many references to the movies “Terminator” and “Blade Runner” and discusses the idea of a cyborg being hybrid between human and machine. It discusses a specific need the organic and the machine have for one another. One of the things the reading also discussed which I had the best understanding of and agree with the most is the idea that not keeping technology and check can be a potential hazard. I actually haven’t seen Blade Runner yet so I can’t go into any real detail on my personal perspective. I think I will better understand this reading and be able to analyze it better after seeing the movie.
“”The Molten State”- A way in which we have an emotional connection and we visualize this event in a different way. I deal with what is real and what is not real all the time. As a videographer and editor I can look at any moment and picture in my head what it would look like as a film. How I would be pictured in the film and what shots and angles the camera would be at. Would we have these memories or think this way if it wasn’t for film and television. She refers to a lot of films that deal with post memory and modern memory. Which memory is real and which is not. If we remember a movie so clearly that we feel it was something we experienced. Does this experience have a negative effect on society? Are we creating fake memories? Memories seem to be subjective to what we want to believe and what we want to experience. With film there is a lot of editing that we go through to get a certain experience. Lighting, music, camera angle- everything that is done in film is to emotionally guide you through the story you are witnessing. We see this force of emotion over and over again this really forces the viewer to view not only the film with these emotions but after repetitiveness we bring this emotional thrust into our lives. These films and emotions seem to form all of these emotions we wouldn’t normally have.