iamnormal707

[iamnormal707]

[Vis Com] Hall: Encoding/Decoding

Topics:

Encoding / Decoding

When a viewer doesn’t understand a message and makes their own take of it.

It is not the fault of the reader because they misunderstood.

The encoded thing may not the decoding may not line up with the og encoding.

People decode of their own term.

Encoding

Sender > message > receiver

Production, circulation, distribution > Consumption and reproduction

Hall’s theory was developed as a response to the traditional process of communication in terms of circulation circuit or loop.

By suggesting the presence of an encoded message, it’s subsequent decoding, as well as decoders, Hall intended to add the missing links in the chain of communication.

The ideological hegemony was a result of the reduced accents within a system, that is, the narrowing of the potential range of values of those preferential in the dominant ideology, allowing its wide application in manipulation.

The encoding and decoding concept were created as a theoretical basis for on praxi attempts to destabilize the hegemonic cultural order.

Decoding = Extracted from a language system.

Communicators encode meanings in the hope that the recipients of their messages extract the meaning they intend.

Three Different Types of messaging Decoding

1. The recipient of their message accepts the dominant code = what the sender of the messages wanted to achieve / the receiver understands what the sender was trying to achieve.

Ideal communication

For Hall, it’s the worst communication since it means that an individual is fully inscribed into the cultural hegemonic order and operates according to the exclusively prevailing codes.

Decoding in the direct correspondence with their encoders.

2. The recipient denies the message backed on the oppositional code = the recipient totally denies the message all together. Their way of the highway.

The decoder takes up a position directly opposite to the dominant ideology.

The audience member deconstructed the hegemonic cultural code and reconstructs it as a code in opposition.

3. The third decoding type deals with negotiated code, which combines both dominant and oppositional codes, thus partly accepting and denying the message = The recipient accepts the message the sender was trying to send but the recipient has their own opinions.

There is only partial concurrency between the encoding and decoding, which is inter alia achieved as a result of negotiations.

The audience member acknowledges the legitimacy of the hegemonic position.

The active role of the recipient and the ability to read the dominant content of a message as oppositional. In this case, the intermediate version of the message, in which part of the dominant values is not recognized, can serve as a manual for campaign development.

[iamnormal707]

JOURNAL [Madness and It’s Myths] Holy Fools

In times pretty very long ago, madness for all intents and purposes was considered something of a gift; but instead of these people being referred to as just being mad, they really, for the most part, were considered “fools.” These fools, also known as “holy fools” during the medieval times, lived life out of step with the life of virtue. Holy Fools generally were considered prophets who publicly acted as if mad or stupid, but really, due to these actions, they were seen as concealing their inner wisdom in a subtle way. They were actually associated with Christianity; the title “holy fool” really was a short way to refer to the behavior called “foolishness for Christ.” Carnivals entertained this idea. Around Christmas time, seven days would be dedicated to this festival, “Feasts of Misrule.” These feasts would be associated with foolishness and drunkenness, but most importantly, rules would mostly be reversed for the days it was celebrated. Fools would be made into kings and/or bishops; particularly, ordinary ideals and practices would be considered blasphemy, and criminal offenses would become legal for the time being. Holy fools were considered prophets who publicly acted as if mad or stupid, but really, due to these actions, they were seen as concealing their inner wisdom.

I wouldn’t particularly say that I, for the most part, was surprised by a lot, but I definitely did learn something. I’m the type of person to go down random YouTube rabbit holes, either that be, videos about medical practices in the Victorian era, real crime documentaries, and general history, which would ultimately include the medieval era. With my prior knowledge of holy fools, both historically and from the media, I knew that they were usually associated with the words mad, hysterical, idiots. What I didn’t know was the meaning of the words, “holy fool.” A “fool” meaning a “mad” person and “holy” meaning “blessed,” and/or a “prophet” to God. During our lesson, I found a connection between holy fools and the witch trials. Both witches and fools were considered hysterical, with the exception that witches were considered evil and fools were considered blessed. These examples show the contradictions between history and what society back then thought. At first, I wondered why these holy fools were always men; why were women not considered holy fools? Women, for a long time, were mistreated and seen lower than men. Thus, only men were considered to have this gift, not women. If women were the ones sprouting “God's words,” they would be considered witches and they would be put on trial. But why? Higher class women had the right to be educated, which was common throughout history, but the poor women on the side were limited to jobs like caring for children, preparing food, and tending to livestock. Although these women were considered important to society, they were expendable. Men, on the other hand, had more freedom. I could expand on this theory but I'd need to do some more research to express my theories factually.

[iamnormal707]

Journal #3 [Madness and It’s Myths] Hysteria

Historically, the word “hysteria” was tied to a woman’s reproductive system. Originally, the term originated in Ancient Greece. The philosophers Hippocrates and Plato spoke about the womb, hystera, and how it caused an array of physical and mental conditions. During the 19th century, female hysteria was talked about more than it'd ever been talked about before. An example of what treatment for female hysteria was, is the short story The Yellow Wallpaper. In the long of short, the story surrounds a woman who suffers from postpartum depression and how she was forced into complete isolation by her husband.

The question is, if hysteria was tied to abnormal behaviour (regardless of the meaning of the word hysteria), why are women the only ones to blame? One would then question the power dynamics when it came to gender. Throughout history, it would seem that women have been used as the scapegoat for anything and everything. For a woman to have female hysteria, their symptoms could range anywhere between depression and mental illness; moral views; relationship status; if she was infertile; menstruation cramps; or even their intelligence rivaling their husbands. There was also the issue of the witch trials, which can now be referred to as mass hysteria. Europe was incredibly religious at the time, thus why most witch trials took place in central Europe more than anywhere. The majority of them would result in death. An example being Germany had the most trials ending in death, approx. 6,887 women. At that time, Germany was fully Christianized during the 16th century (which is when the trials took place)(Religion in Germany, n.d.). Women would be put on trial on any accord deemed suspicious (even if it was mundane) by society. Women would be called a witch if they were widowers; herbal women/doctors; had menstruation pains; suffered from mental illnesses. Since then, the majority have moved past that point. Being a witch is a form of empowerment, not restricted to gender, for anyone can be considered a witch. With the practice of spirituality, witchcraft, voodoo, or paganism, all witches use their mediums to better themselves, hand back the power of themselves to them; going against religious and oppressive forces.

Before this lecture, I would’ve never realized how passionate I would be about this topic. What surprised me was that in every exorcist movie, the one to be possessed was always a young girl. That revelation expanded my world and made me think back to my childhood and all the media consumed and is still consumed by me even till this day. I did not realize that it was a trope up until that week. I found myself relating back to this lecture like never before.

I, myself, identify as a witch and practice things like witchcraft, spiritually, and slowly crawling my way into modern paganism. I always knew about the witch trials and have read about the history behind them during my personal studies. Even before it was mentioned during the lecture, my mind went straight to the Salem Witch Trials and the ones all around Europe. Although I knew about the religious factors, only when the class talked more did the statistics really slap me in the face. Needless to say, I would think that the majority of us would be put on trial if we were from those days.

The only thing that I did not fully agree with was the statement, “witchcraft is a feminist movement.” Myself and others of the witch community can agree that the line between the mainstream media and witchcraft is beginning to blur, but not necessarily in a good way. Yes, witchcraft is advertised and is about manifesting and using magickal means as a way to empower oneself and encourage oneself to strive to be a better person. Everyone can be a witch, if they believe or do not believe; it’s all about getting the desired outcome you hope for.

The problem of the mainstream media is that they usually twist the words of the people from the community. Witchcraft, spiritualism, etc, are about empowerment of oneself, but the craft itself is much more versatile than what the media presents it as being. Witches themselves are still oppressed in society due to the community feeling misrepresented and being the butt of the joke. Only when looked at with a critical and analytical eye, are these crafts respected for what they truly are(like this amazing class); regardless if the one analyzing agrees or does not agree with the practice. The majority of practitioners do not turn a blind eye to things like science, history, psychology, or anything that some people would assume we’d turn a blind eye to. Witchcraft is not a feminist movement, it is versatile and cannot be owned by a certain defining word; it is expansive and means different things to different people.

[iamnormal707]

JOURNAL # 1 [MADNESS AND MYTHS] Erich Fromm

Erich Fromm was a great German social psychologist and had the unique perspective of the idea of sanity directly linking to the creation of homo sapians beginnings. Although his words are dated, his points are certainly not; he believes that as humans evolved and left the unity of nature, they were all meant to go insane but only some were strong enough to keep their sanity. Once leaving the womb of their mother, they are weak, helpless, unlike their primal counterparts.

When baby giraffes are first born they instantly learn how to walk, although still wobbly, they have that direct instinct to walk. When babies are first born, they can't walk, lift their heads, or even open their eyes. In terms of the Joker, Fromm’s theory of narcissism and biographic traumas intersect with immense force. Arthur, the Joker, said “[f]or my whole life I didn’t even know I existed.”

Only when he murdered those boys, got attention from the news, and started a movement, he felt as if he existed; This instance would fit within Fromm’s definitions of ID, Ego, and SuperEgo. What Joker felt towards the end of the movie was his super ego; He felt as if he was some sort of God, the people worshiping him got to his head.

During the first part of the movie, he focused on a combination of Ego and ID. ID being his initial needs; Putting food on the table, taking care of his mom, holding down a job, as well, he made an effort to care for himself mentally. His Ego would be his initial need, but it didn’t necessarily make him happy.

Overall, Both Fromm and Joker correlate within the realm of mad studies.

Although I was not in class that day, just learning about the topics on my own was immensely interesting. Fromm was a tough read, but even when he started referencing a lot of religious texts that I didn’t know about, which I skimmed, I was thoroughly intrigued. I could reflect upon the situation upon myself and step into others shoes. What stood out to me most was his reasoning behind everyone’s insane.

As I mentioned in my summary above, because of this lost unity with nature, we are more aware of our loneliness and helplessness; we consider ourselves individuals and not a part of something; an example used in the text being nature. We are meant to go insane without that unity; there’s only those lucky few that are able to keep their sanity. I feel as if I can go into a spiral just reading into this topic, the studies of madness, nature, and nurture, are all fascinating. As for the Joker, the first time I watched the movie, back when it was released, I didn’t quite understand it. But now, with a lens this class provided me, I was able to understand more in depth. I relate to him in some sense and could feel empathy towards him. He grew up in an environment that was against him, an environment that he didn’t have the power to change. He poses the statement, if a rich person dies, his death would be known. If he would die on the streets, his death would be disregarded. Just in this line, a great weight of questions of politics, the economics of the world is put on the consumer. Our world is not equal, if the world was equal nothing about the goodness or badness of society would change.

Masterlist

[iamnormal707]

[WK 9#] Iceberg Storytelling

During our 9th week we learned about “Iceberd Storytelling” in relations to a research project we had to produce.

Paragraph [#1]

The first paragraph should contain the TITLE, TWT(total watch time), and NAME OF DIRECTOR.

The first paragraph is meant to summarize the story/main plot elements of the film and provide a brief summary of the characters.

You need to identify the genre of the film:

Drama, comedy, romance, etc…

And overall mood:

Chilling, uplifting, romantic, etc…

Paragraph [#2]

Describe the different shots you would like to include and why. Ex:

XCU, CU, XMS, MS, XLS, LS

Describe the colour pallet, camera angles, editing style, pacing and sound design.

Are there any specific elements / ideas that really resonate with you?

Describe these elements in detail. What was the message / concept / idea you think the filmmaker was trying to get across. We’re they successful in getting this across to their viewers?

Remember: Write as if your audience haven’t seen the film

Paragraph [#3 - Conclusion]

The closing statement

The closing statement is where you summarizes the elements that left an impression on you and/or the main aspects of the film/media.

Masterlist

[iamnormal707]

Photos of San Francisco in the 1970s.

[iamnormal707]

Cologne, Germany (by Tobias Rademacher)

See more of Germany | Europe.

Enjoy our curated content? You can support us here.

[iamnormal707]

Guy Bourdin - Susan Moncur (Vogue Paris 1971)

[iamnormal707]

source

[iamnormal707]

St. Catherine Street, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 1960s

[iamnormal707]

Albert Einstein, photographed by Hermann Landshoff, 1950.

[iamnormal707]

[Wk 6 BLOG 6] Natalie Murao

Today we talked to Natalie Murao, an award winning Vancouver filmmaker known for her works, Blue Garden, No More Parties, Sprout, Floating Light, and Like The Flow of a River. She started off with a quote by her old university professor, “[c]inema is only like 100 years old. It’s still a young medium.(Nicolas Pereda)” She explained how this really struck a cord with her. She explained that film is still a new concept, newer than the other media out there, which is why film will only evolve further; that the present is not forever, but that it’ll grow.

We learn’t about the steps to having ideas; how to develop ideas for screen. 

1. Collecting data

Collecting anything that inspires you or anything that makes you think about your project. Ex. crating a Pinterest, google docs, music playlist. 

2. Organizing data 

Figuring out what to do with that data; why did it stick with you; what do you like about the data?

3. Incubating the material 

Sleeping on it; thinking about it; letting it sit with you, seeing if any ideas pop out at you. 

4. Preserving the spark

Finding a way to keep the idea from dying. It’s important to be patient with yourself, not passive. You’ll be figuring out if this idea is worth it or if it should be put to the side and used for a different project in the future; whatever makes you feel productive.

We then learnt about what a film treatment was. 

A film treatment is a proposal of the film to present to a producer, studio, or to submit for a grant. The document includes: What ideas are you trying to get across? A synopsis, summary of characters, locations you’d shoot at, and scenes you’d like to create. Film treatments can include photos --collages-- of your ideas. 

My Response 

This gave me a good insight into what I was doing long before this lesson. As someone who wants to turn a book into a movie, I find both the idea cycle and film treatment very useful tools for both the present and the future. Since 2020, I came up with this one book idea and have been working on it since. I added a screenshot of my Pintrest board down below. 

[iamnormal707]

[WK 5 BLOG #5] Peele and Gerwig

Today in Writing and Media Cultures, we discussed the works of Jordan Peele and Greta Gerwig. Both Peele and Gerwig are seen as fresh voices in Hollywood; they use their life experiences and apply them to their films. They’re seen as fresh due to being unrepresented and making a rise in an industry mostly made up of white men. In a study --dating all the way back to the early 2000s-- they found that only 54% of women directors'films became best reviewed and award winning. In another study, it was found that over the same period of time, the ratio of white to unrepresented directors in 5.7 - 1.

  “Get Out” (2017) and “NOPE” (2022)

We touched upon the two best reviewed films of Peele’s, “NOPE” and “Get Out.”

“I thought that the victimization of black people and the villainization of white people done in a fun way would be something that [financiers] couldn’t imagine...”(Peele)

Peele both wrote and directed these films, bringing his own life experiences into his work, displaying a more authentic and real experience to the audience.

Gerwig’s “Lady Bird” (2017)

Greta Girwig’s “Lady Bird” was both written and directed by Gerwing herself. It’s a coming-of-age comedy / drama, censured around a girl named Lady Bird who goes to a Catholic school is Sacramento, California. 

Being a woman in a male-dominated industry, her voice breaks down the stereotypical bounds with her complex ideas and new standpoints, offering an authentic display of non-stereotypical female characters.

My Response 

I wouldn’t say I’m reminded of any film or media, but, I do relate as a woman who’s on the path set to the film industry.

Being a viewer, I have never realized that most of my favourite films were directed and produced by mostly white men, which is due to the fact that the media rarely creates buzz for talented, unrepresented people. In closing, I hope that that ratio of the underrepresented will receive the success they deserve so that I --a woman-- can receive that same success.

[iamnormal707]

[WK 4 BLOG #4] Intersectionality

During the 4th week of Writing and Media Cultures we talked about intersectionality with the example of Bell Hook's writings. The term, intersectionality, was first coined by Krimberle Crenshaw in 1989; Intersectionality is how race, gender, and other individual characteristics intersect and overlap with one another.

Bell Hooks - Teaching Transgress: Education as the practice of Freedom

Focusing on Hook's book, Teaching Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom, Hook shares her life as an African American woman who taught primarily white schools as well as primarily black schools. The --what they refer to as-- bougies schools were advertised as a place for freedom of speech and diverse learning; but Hook discovered that the education system was interlaced with intersectionality discrimination. Herself and students would be alienated and shutdown for voicing opposing ideas that challenge the values of the school. While being black and a woman, Hook was almost forced to fit in by rejecting her former values which she grew up with.

How I Relate

I could say I would've been a victim of intersectionality a few times while I was in school. When I was in elementary, I moved around a lot, but, my second school was in a primarily white neighbourhood. I am a mixed person, both south and east Asian as well as European; I stood out in the neighbourhood for being one of the few kids of colour. I was told that when my mom was dropping me off at school a white woman came up to my mom and said, "It's nice to have a little bit of spice in the neighbourhood." As well, in middle school I was known as the chubby girl who was bad at math and had a brain injury. I was bullied due to all those facts, which caused me to have a low self-esteem that still affects me after all these years.

[iamnormal707]

Journal #1 [Madness and It’s Myths] Eugenics

Eugenics was a term first coined by Sir Francis Galton in 1883. In his words, he describes eugenics as "the science of improving stock(Sir Francis Galton, 1883.)" There were two different types of eugenics. The positive side—which was still not very positive—encourages certain people to marry and reproduce so their "kind" will stay quarantined. On the negative side, they would prohibit people from reproduction by sterilization; they’d tie women's tubes and induce vasectomies for males. Eugenics was popular not only in the United Kingdom but in Europe and both of the Americas, with Alberta and British Columbia being the most brutal. People in poverty; people who were considered immigrants; aboriginals; prostitutes; criminals; those with disorders; and the mentally and physically "subnormal" were victims of the practise of eugenics. Many Canadians supported eugenics during the early 20th century, as did some medical professionals, politicians, and feminists. Multiple Sexual Sterilization Acts were passed in Alberta and British Columbia in 1928 and 1933, respectively, and were not repealed until the 1970s.

Reflection

Although I was not present for class, I could say from looking at the slides, articles, and video, this was quite interesting. In a sense, I’m surprised, but in the latter, I am not. Canada has done many horrible things in the past, from institutions like the Lakeshore campus to residential schools. Within the last few years, many things have come into light-- spreading awareness to mainstream society. I wasn’t surprised about the use of eugenics. I’ve always liked documentaries about dark history and how it still effects us today-- whether that be positive or negative. It’s interesting; the repercussions of our past—not just eugenics—from long ago are still prevalent in our society. Within the world's culture now, eugenics would be described as the acts of ableism, racism, and economic discrimination. Being in the categories that could’ve caused me to fall victim to eugenics, if born around that time, makes it all too realistic. I have epilepsy, a brain disorder, as well as mental illness, and knowing that I could’ve been subjected to that kind of treatment is immensely upsetting.

[iamnormal707]

[WK 3 BLOG #3] Ruling Class and Ruling Ideas

During our 4th class of Writing and Media Cultures we discussed about the Ruling class and ruling ideas that dictate our societies.

We first talked about Karl Marx --a German philosopher who established the Marxist theory, being that, society develops through class struggle. He believed that there were two main classes, the ruling and the working, or--sometimes called, the 1% and the 99%.

We then focused our attention on another philosopher as well as a social scientist and writer; Fredrich Egels. He developed the Marxist theory alongside Karl Marx. He wrote, within the book 'The German Ideology', the' Ruling Class and Ruling Ideas' alongside Marx.

What is the ruling class and why does it dictate the ruling idea?

The ruling class is what one would describe as the 1%, the privileged ones of our society. They dictate us through material means, whether that be money or power. If we think of the relationship between the ruling class and ruling idea within history, we think of aristocracies or royalty; Within that age, their ideologies were prim, proper--the woman being submissive and the men dominate, courteous, and everything you'd expect from that time. The ruling classes dominant ideologies ended up controlling the working class, causing them to have a carbon copy extension of themselves.

History teaches us how the ruling class has always had the 99 percentile act like cattle. An example of this would be the media of today. The 1% would be the popular, famous or powerful. Trend setters would also fit into the 1%, most of the time they --like the rest of the ruling class, depend on materialistic objects. That can be clothes, collections, figurines, money, cars, anything really. Just like trend setters, the ruling class controls us so naturally that it can be difficult to spot within our society because it intertwined itself within our culture.

My Take

Myself, personally being a part of the working class, have been unknowingly effected by a lot of the ruling ideas -- mostly the fashion trends. The ruling ideas are not noticeable; they are invisible, according to McLuhans theory. The medium is the message or massage. The medium, being the ruling ideas, massage the audience-- entwining their culture with their own, to make the transition of power as naturally as possible. Who I am has not changed, but an extension of myself has been added. My own cultural ideals, values, develop with new dominating ideas from the outside world. These ruling ideas are neither good nor bad; it's the way the consumer themselves manifests said ideas. In closing, I agree with this whole theory. The 1% has a lot of control over our population, more than we really think. There is no straight opinion that I can truly close with since I am only through 18% of my life and have not experienced as much of the effects that come with those ruling ideas.

338 words

[iamnormal707]

Masterlist  School Blogs / Journals

Semester One

Writing and Media Cultures

Week 1 (Exquisite Corpse Activity)

Week 2 (Ideologies and Personality)

Week 3 (Ruling Class and Ruling Ideas)

Week 4 (Intersectionality)

Week 5 (Jordan Peele and Greta Gerwig)

Week 6 (Natalie Murao)

Week 9 (Iceberg storytelling)

Madness and it’s Myths 

Journal #1 (Eugenics)

Journal #2 (Erich Fromm)

Journal #3 (Hysteria)

Journal #4 (Holy Fools)

Visual Communication

Hall: Encoding/Decoding