Where You Are Right Now

It was unseasonably warm for early March. The sun was shining bright, vibrantly illuminating the cloudless sky, while the gentle breeze rustled the bare branches of the trees lining the landscape. This beautiful weather, however, was being spoiled by the discomfort of the starch soaked shirt and noose tight tie I was being forced to wear.

“Are you sure its supposed to be this tight?” I complained.

“Stop moaning, you can take it off right when the thing is over anyway,” answered my father.

“Alright, but if I keel over from lack of oxygen to my brain I am blaming God.”

Fittingly, all I received in response was infamous the evil eye. Valuing my immediate health, I knew it was in my best interest to cease with the attempts at humor. We were approaching the giant doors of the church anyway.

I never possessed an internal calling for religious worship, due primarily to the boredom, as a product of the hours slouching in the uncomfortable pews. Not to mention it often created serious conflicts with soccer matches on Sunday afternoons. Mom, however, thought it was important, loading us in the car just about every Sunday bright and early.

When my sixteenth birthday rolled around, Mom said I was old enough to get confirmed. My immediate reaction was the most obvious of questions, “So…?”

“So, its something you should do,” was the most forceful rebuttal.

Eventually, not having much say in the matter, I had to go. I went in without any notion of what the journey entailed, much like both Marlo Morgan and Julia Butterfly. Consistent with both authors, the entire length of the experience would shape my views and perspectives for the remainder of my life.
Every Sunday for the better part of six months, I was cramped inside a damp, dingy classroom, learning about the lessons and traditions of “my” United Methodist religion. Ultimately, although, I would interpret the philosophies in a manner differing from the intended context of the church itself, the perception helped me more accurately identify my personal relationship to spirituality.

As the weeks progressed, I began to notice a notable trend in the content of the lectures. All the discussions seemed to lack personal resonance, as I interpreted them as convoluted examples of common sense issues. They lacked the powerful underlying meanings that I had expected, supposedly coming from an omnipotent perspective of being. Central in these discussions was the issue of death, and the accompanying dilemma of the afterlife. We conjectured seemingly endless possibilities pertaining to the judgment of souls, conferring the consequences of our actions in the state of human consciousness. However, in totality, the answers the group had settled on were strictly based on faith in an undefined source that had no substance, other than that granted to it by believers. Compounding the conundrum was the doctrine elucidating the manner in which people are supposed to act, as it was based firmly on fear of reprisals in the afterlife. Yet, at the same time we were being taught that God was a superlative being who was to forgive all of our transgressions. Personally, they seemed to be merely complicating that matter at hand. The objective of religion, as I interpret it to be, is to provide people with a blueprint for a life defined by moral character. What about people who do not seek such a map for life, but would rather discover it along the way. Living a life of high moral standard with a regard for other people does not require an element of religion. For me, this guidance seemed unneeded and unimportant.

By the end of the course, I had decided that the whole situation was not in my best interest. Approaching my family with this judgment on the other hand, was a different monster in itself. I had no idea how I would tackle my mother’s opinion on the circumstances. So I didn’t. I procrastinated until the day I was to be confirmed, which was now upon us.

As we entered the church, my thoughts immediately began mulling over all that had been taught to our group. Many of the students had bought into the beliefs of the church, making it somewhat hard to relate to their position. It was not that I thought religion was a negative entity. In fact, it can be quite the opposite for some people. It teaches the most basic of quality human characteristics and positive lessons translatable to life. Countless people are provided with the answers and faith they need to lead a healthy life. For me on the other hand, all these rules and teachings seemed rather unnecessary. The grandiose stories and elaborate teachings all pointed a common denominator of basic decency. I did not need the promise of a trip to heaven or quell with fear of damnation in hell to act in a positive manner. What was I really doing here anyway?

The enormity of the situation really didn’t hit me until the ceremony was over and I was at the reception with members of my family.

“So, do you believe in God?”

I knew this question had been brewing in my aunt’s head for a good 16 years, giving me ample time to conjure up some kind of response. However, all I could mutter, not to definitively was, “Uhhhhhh…..sure?”

Immediately realizing the sheer comedy in the answer, I turned and walked away. After spending a portion of my life coming here, listening to someone ramble on and on about the teachings of the Savior of the human race and the beauty of and power of God, I was just now realizing I was not buying it.

I walked alone through the expansive halls of the church, making my way to the main sanctuary. Upon reaching the threshold, I stopped for a moment and took in the entirety of the occasion. In the front was the altar, adorned with multihued flowers marking the occasion of our group becoming confirmed members of the church. Behind the altar was the massive organ and choir section, ordained with gold trim and lavish woodwork. Positioned to capture the happenings from the front were the sections of pews that filled the majority of the church. Simple, rigid structures, they seemed to represent the idea of what the proper follower was to exemplify: a portrait of obedience and sameness, adhering to the shape and standard they were given by their creator. The most symbolic piece of furniture, though, was the podium erected for the pastor to speak from. From my point of view, it represented the thought of his elevation above the rest of the people inside the church, as his podium was physically higher than the rest of the seats in the room. Why should he be received as better than the other people there to congregate? With his position, is he automatically on a different level with God then all the other people there? Why should one person be held higher than any other person? Within this religion, I was to believe that this person could enlighten me on how to behave in order to be in favor with God. But how was I to know that he is right? Or for that matter, why should I assume supremeness in these beliefs without having explored the nature of the world and its people myself? Did I need someone to show me how to do that? No. I could benefit much more from trial and failure than guided, but ultimately, blind faith along a path already traveled by countless others before me.

As I walked through the sanctuary, early afternoon light poured in via the stained glass windows, throwing vivacious color all over the room. The actual beauty of the room caught my attention, causing me realize why it all seemed so illogical to me. This massive structure of intricate makings and human effort, built so that people could come to be told how to live their lives correctly. Why should someone be told what to do, when they can go seek the answers themselves? Is it the answers we should be seeking at all? Every second I thought I had figured it out, more questions permeated my thoughts. Exponentially they multiplied, filling every crevasse of my brain. Why do people seek the answers to questions that cannot be answered?

On the surface, this experience seems to have created more questions than answers. In the end, however, is that a bad thing? Like Marlo Morgan and Julia Butterfly, I reentered my world with a new perspective. A perspective that allowed me to understand that experience must be translated through as many perceptions as possible. All the questions I now had fueled thought and action, rather than the belief I was on the right path. They call idleness the devil’s playground, but many people of strict religious adherence are idle in their interpretation and perspectives on experience. Adhering to one train of thought will give you answers, but it steals from you the ability to explore the world fully.
I promptly told my mom on the way home that I was not going to go to church anymore. More surprised than anything it seemed, all she could say was, “Why…you put in a lot of time to just do this.”

I answered frankly, “I experienced it and its not for me.”
Although not totally in agreement, she was supportive when I asked to have my confirmation rescinded.

When I go to church with my mom from time to time to keep her company, I take in the sermons from a new perspective. A perspective that values the experience and allows me to add to my awareness of the world around me.

Lyrics of the Day

Telling lyrics here from Brand New’s “Jesus” off of their latest album “The Devil and God are Raging Inside Me” (2006).

Jesus Christ, that’s a pretty face
The kind you’d find on someone I could save
If they don’t put me away
Well, it’ll be a miracle

Do you believe you’re missing out
That everything good is happening somewhere else?
But with nobody in your bed
The night’s hard to get through

And I will die all alone
And when I arrive I won’t know anyone

Well Jesus Christ, I’m alone again
So what did you do those three days you were dead?
Cause this problem’s gonna last more than the weekend.

Well Jesus Christ, I’m not scared to die,
I’m a little bit scared of what comes after
Do I get the gold chariot?
Do I float through the ceiling?

Do I divide and pull apart?
Cause my bright is too slight to hold back all my dark
And this ship went down in sight of land
And at the gates does Thomas ask to see my hands?

I know you’re coming in the night like a thief
(So throw your tongue in mine)
But I’ve had some time, oh Lord, to hone my lying technique
(I know it’s so hard breathing in alone)
I know you think that I’m someone you can trust
(And you were right, I know I said you were wrong)
But I’m scared I’ll get scared and I swear I’ll try to nail you back up
(I always said you were wrong)
So do you think that we could work out a sign
So I’ll know it’s you and that it’s over so I won’t even try

I know you’re coming for the people like me
But we all got wood and nails
And we turn out hate in factories
Yeah, we all got wood and nails
And we turn out hate in factories
Yeah, we all got wood and nails
And we sleep inside of this machine

Anatomy of Goal

Check out this slide show of the late winner from Graciano Brito that propelled the Bobcats over Sacred Heart.

Anatomy of a Goal

Better Uses For That Junk in Your Trunk

In today’s society, numerous different maladies compound the problems and pressures that we continually put on our environment. Whether we choose to pollute the land, air, or water, the cyclical nature of the life processes on Earth reflect the damage back onto us. Unfortunately, we tend to hear a great deal about these mounting atrocities and the potentially catastrophic harm they entail, rather than possible solutions to curb these problems. In turn, the general public often feels over whelmed, as this seems to be an inescapable, inherent element of our lives, too huge of an issue for anyone one person to tackle in a meaningful way.

What a many of us do not realize is the potentially great impact one can impart in the fight for a cleaner and healthier environment. This power is not derived from any special talent or skill set, special educational background or expertise, or top secret information. It is actually something very simple that many of us have been doing for most of our lives, but have not realized the importance it entails. This practice is the act of recycling.

Today, recycling is an oft overlooked aspect of our environmental preservation. With its practice almost a generation old, we begin to forget how much production energy we save through recycling alone. This does not even take into account the incalculable amount of power used to dispose of extra waste dumped into landfills every year that could have been recycled.

When we think of recycling, the first thing that comes to many peoples’ minds is aluminum cans. It can be assumed this is because most of us encounter these types of materials on a daily basis, whether we are paying a can deposit at the store or throwing our empty soda can away at lunch. However, other common items that we us use on a regular basis are members of the growing tree of products that can be recycled. Programs exist for many plastic items, paper products, most processed glass, and even yard waste and food scraps, all of which account for large percentages of our generated yearly waste.

The only way to curb continued under utilization of indispensable courses of action is to educate society by propagating information about the programs in place. All of these methods take very little effort on the part of the consumer. Every state in the union, as well as the District of Columbia, has instituted some variation of recycling legislation. Nevertheless, the basic principles and practices remain the same, along with the intended effects; saving the ecological integrity of our planet.
Recycling does not require a big picture effort to be taken for it to be effective. In fact, the way in which just about every American can contribute is one in which many do not even realize holds such importance. This is in the area of aluminum. In the span of three months, Americans throw away enough aluminum to rebuild our commercial air fleet in its entirety. In fact, when we recklessly throw a can into the garbage, rather than a recycling receptacle, we are wasting the equivalent amount of energy that would be derived from half of that can’s volume in gasoline. From beer and soft drink containers, 99% of which are made out of aluminum, only 49% were recovered through recycling, along with only 40% of all recyclable aluminum.

What many of us do not realize is that by recycling our aluminum cans, we are contributing to a process that conserves virgin materials and saves money used in the refining processes. Producing new cans from previously used aluminum takes 95% less energy than making them from unrefined materials. This means that by recycling, we can produce 20 cans from recyclable products, to every one made from virgin ore. Consequently, recycling one aluminum can saves enough energy to keep a 100-watt bulb burning for four hours.

As we can see, our current processes for recycling aluminum are greatly effective, when utilized. The average aluminum can is made of 40% postconsumer recycled products, reducing energy consumption. This translates to an energy usage rate of 8 BTU’s of energy to make one ton of cans from recycled aluminum, as opposed to a needed 229 BTU’s of energy to produce the same output from unrefined materials. Plus, this process has relatively quick turnover. A can that is entered into the recycling system is back in the consumer stream, used, then returned to the recycling system in about six weeks (SWD).

Another often overlooked portion of widely consumed materials in the recycling system is glass. Not long ago, Americans dumped 10.9 million tons of glass into the waste system, with only 22% of this total being recovered for recycling. However, this rate is steadily increasing, as recovered material has grown to over 2.4 million tons. Glass is a key to the recycling system as so many products, from containers, to computers, to windows, are made using glass. The durability of glass allows it to retain its strength even after many cycles through the system. As a result of this strength, there is an increased demand from industry for recycled glass to create new products with better cost efficiency. Only sand is used in greater volume to produce new glass products than recycled glass itself. Just like recycled aluminum, recycled glass costs less than the raw materials used to produce new glass, as it melts at a lower temperature, therefore demanding less energy from the electricity, natural gas, or coal. This means that there are less emissions from the factories producing the materials, helping to save the environment from greenhouse gases.

The third piece to the common recyclable container puzzle is plastic products. This facet of the system is utilized in many homes and communities, but considering the ease at which it can be implemented and carried out, it is still a much under used resource. Since 1960, when the total amount of plastic waste generated represented barely 1% of the total waste, plastics pushed into the waste system has grown to account for more than 11% of the total waste product in the United States. Today, plastic materials are used to manufacture such products we use daily as beverage containers, kitchen utensils, and automobile parts, explaining much of the increase in their waste production (Minerals).
Many plastic products differ greatly from one another, therefore, a classification system was devised to better implement a recycling system, know as the Resin Identification Code. Each type of plastic is classified in one of seven different categories that differ based upon the levels and types of resin found within certain products and containers. This system mainly targeted consumer containers to allow communities to better facilitate an efficient system. Citizens in communities that support these programs are instructed on what “numbers” of plastic are able to be submitted for recycling. Some communities have curbside pick up with general trash collection, while others have drop off locations citizens bring their materials to (SWD).

Although the return rate for plastics is small, hovering around 40%, they are steadily on the rise. Like other materials, recycled plastic saves both energy and money through saved energy in processing practices. The production of plastics has accounted for a whopping 4% of the total energy consumption in America. This may seem minor, but when considered how many other variables factor into energy consumption, any one area accounting for such a large portion of usage is significant. However, in an environmental sense, the stress that slowly deteriorating plastics put on our landfills is a more pressing issue. Many types of plastics take years to completely return to a state that is acceptable to the environment. This waste continues to pill up, squeezing the already shrinking space in our landfills (NRC).

Many of us associate paper recycling to merely white paper used in our business and schools and the daily newspaper. However, the recycling of paper products extends into areas that seem obvious once introduced. Cardboard, packaging materials, magazines, telephone directories, etc., the list goes on of daily products that are also available for recycling. Still, paper products account for one of the largest portions of municipal waste, at a rate of 36%. This creates a great market for recycling and products made solely from recycled materials, as many packages, newspapers and office paper are made from 100% recycled materials (SWD).

The recycling systems for paper are not so simple, however. To create high grade products, only high grade, long fiber paper may be used in the process. Lower grades of paper are used to create low grade, short fiber products, such as that found in most newspapers. Generally, these waste streams are kept separate to ensure quality, as high grade, low grade, and cardboard products provide the common breakdown categories (Corrugated).

Reducing the amount of solid waste we decide to dump each year extends beyond these common methods. Recycling organic materials, such as food scraps and yard trimmings, significantly reduces the strain put on our landfills and incinerators. This method is practiced by government entities, big business, and individuals alike, the latter becoming the most critical. Of the total tonnage of waste generated, 12% was labeled yard trimmings, while food scraps followed close behind registering 11%. Surprisingly, yard trimming recovery has increased to almost 60%, while food scraps has lagged behind at a measly 2% (EPA).

Both of these figures can be increased greatly through introduction of composting techniques by individuals. Although many people would understandably not have enough room to create an adequate area for a compost heap of yard trimmings, such a heap composed of food scraps is not a huge undertaking. Food leftovers are the single largest component of the waste stream, contributing 96 billion pounds of waste each year. This includes uneaten foods and preparation wastes from residences, restaurants and other commercial establishments, and educational and industrial lunchrooms. Although the EPA’s hierarchy of food scrap disposal involves recovering food for the hungry, for livestock, zoos and animals shelters, and industrial processes in general, still the most realistic way to contribute is by composting materials (SWD).

Individual yard trimming disposal has increased in popularity recently, helping to reduce landfill build up and methane production. Still, there are ways to help the environment even if composting is not an option. There are countless programs set up locally and regionally for people to participate in yard material disposal. Also, many communities have composting programs for people to dump biodegradable materials, creating new soil for causes like garden projects and urban reclamation. One of the simplest ways is to keep your lawn at a manageable length, leaving the mulched clippings in the grass to decompose back into the soil and help feed the environment (SWD).

Understanding the impact we have on the health and beauty of the Earth is a key component to the general Gaia theory and the interconnectedness of life itself. Great revelations pertaining to the purpose of man will never be attained until we begin to recognize our influences on a smaller, more immediate scale. Therefore, finding meaning in caring for our planet is both a step in the right direction economically and culturally.

To put effort into such endeavors is investing in the environmental infrastructure of the Earth and the ethos of our intellectual development.

http://www.solidwastedistrict.com/information/stats.htm, (SWD)

http://www.corrugated.org/Recycling/RecyclingStats.aspx, (Corrugated)

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/recycle/, (Minerals)

http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/recycle.htm, (EPA)

http://www.nrc-recycle.org/resources/electronics/policy.htm, (NRC)

Body Bag

A little no-budget Neo-noir for your viewing pleasure…

Lyrics of the Day

Sparta’s “End Moraine” off their “Porcelain” (2004) album is the pick for today. Check this song out.

This is your history
You made what you will be
Facts are of no concern
They upset your story
The past is what we learn
It upholds your glory
Revisionist history

I want glaciers to scrape
I want to level this place
Everyone in it can go

The truth will tear this ground
Slowly melted down
Revisionist History

What you’re taught
Free to forget
You’re supposed to know
Learn on your own

It’s exposed, End moraine
Funnel down, See with your own eyes
Simple talk, End moraine
Simple thought
And total loyalty
They’ll build armies
In excuse for explorers
Know with your own eyes
Feel with our own hands

Media Conglomeration

Although certain specific media outlets are often targeted as contributors to a news culture continually loosing favor with the American public, they do not carry the blame unaccompanied. Likewise, there are no free passes in the arena of public criticism.

We can target the beginning of the shift in news media’s position as a pillar of American democracy with the inclusion of American capitalism. This is by no means an endorsement for Communism, but rather a call for a closer examination at the nature of decisions made when big money becomes intertwined with our information outlets.

Indisputably, providing news to the people has always been a business. Understandably, within this business there has always been a constant jockeying by media outlets, whether it be to provide information across the same medium, like the yellow journalism days around the turn of the 19th century, or to harness delivery and content through multiple media as we see today. Competition for readers, viewers, listeners and revenue has always been fierce. The difference today exists in the role information and news plays in driving this revenue for many companies. Decisions made at the top of the food chain in these corporations reflect a new, and potentially dangerous, precedent for the purpose of reporting.

Profits from their papers, both direct and indirect, was an obvious goal for both William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer in printing their respective dailies The Journal and The World. Through their heated battles, they knew the content of their papers was the determining factor that would draw their readers and, hence, their profits. Skilled reporting was key as the press coveted their “watchdog role” discussed by Kovach and Rosenstiel (112). It is important to understand these men’s work and profit structure was based strictly around the news. Ad revenue surely was a major factor in their revenue model, but news and reporting was their business.

Today media consolidation has changed the dynamic reporters shared with the public. Investigative journalism still exists, but not necessarily with the same fervor it was once know for. This is an indictment against the manner in which the decisions are made on what to report and how to report it. Six companies, AOL Time Warner, Vivendi Universal, The Walt Disney Company, News Corp., Bertelsmann AG, and Viacom now control the vast majority of media outlets worldwide. Through this continued practice of horizontal integration, large corporations have their interests and influence spread over a far-reaching cross section of not only the media, but also the economy (C&R, 41-43). This creates a number of problems for us as consumers and citizens.

Ownership economics are now a major piece of the puzzle for top executives examining news they want coming from their outlets. Here is a hypothetical example. The Walt Disney Company owns ABC and all the news outlets that go along with it. They also own Hollywood Records, a lucrative and well know label with a host of big name stars, including Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus. Let’s say an ABC entertainment correspondent picked up on some piece of true information that would be extremely damaging to Ms. Cyrus’s career (I will leave your imagination to the details). This is all happening days ahead of her new album release and world tour. She currently fetches over $100 a ticket and has millions of records sold, not to mention her television show and merchandising. It would seem like a reasonable business decision from a monetary standpoint to delay the spread of this information as much as possible, even if it means putting the clamps on your own reporters.

Although this is a rather frivolous example, these are the kind of the situations presenting themselves more and more as industry compacts its ownership. What happens when a news outlet uncovers something of a socioeconomic or public health importance that clashes with the economic structure of the media outlets charged with disseminating the information? The pressure from the top down to keep profit margins can most certainly be the difference between people keeping their jobs or being unemployed. This seems less like media consolidation alone and more like horizontal corporations with overlapping interests (Tobacco, Video).

With major news choices being pulled away from the reporters covering the stories and put into the hands of major corporation interests, not only do we stand to lose certain stories due to economics, but also to a sheer lack of voices. With media consolidation the news is simply being filtered down the hierarchy with little or no change in scope or perspective (McChesney, Interview).

Much of this problem stems from the extreme and embarrassing lack of diversity among those who own media outlets. For those who are not already entrenched in the major media ownership circle, it is only getting harder to purchase rights and interests to broadcast. Gaining the loans and start up capital from banks has been a major hurdle most minorities looking to own cannot clear. Without these voices and perspectives our society and our news suffers from a serious lack of scope and a bland flavor (WVON, Video).

The inquisition against major corporations does not, however, exonerate the reporters from the deterioration of realistic reporting. As an industry, elite reporters may scatter the airwaves championing the cause for better journalism practices, but it in the they defer to those who sign their checks every week. Media consolidation has helped the reporter in a financial sense, to rise from the middle class blue-collar wages of the 19th and early 20th century to the cultural (and financial) icon status of the major nightly news anchor.

This elevation is not inherently laced with evil. By no means should journalists be forced to trade in financial success just because someone says so. On the other hand, the manner in which this rise has come through our news outlets has created definite problems in our journalistic traditions. Early investigative reporting was driven by the determined reporter who was not only making a living, but was there to have a positive effective on his readership by uncovering the ills in the community. He lived among the people he reported for and shared their thoughts and concerns.

Now these same reporters of influence generally occupy a place in society well outside the average working man. This has caused much of the nation to feel as though the press has lost touch with the public they claim to serve. Earlier I purported that our media was not providing us with a diversity of voice and opinion, but with the persistence of this trend even a concerted effort to vary the voices over the air will matter less and less as people simply stop listening altogether (Why America Hates the Press, Video).

Influential journalists did not rise to their elevated positions of wealth and influence merely through their salaries as reporters, however. As we saw in the Tobacco video, more journalists are becoming tied to big business directly. Labeled as pundits, these journalists take large payouts to speak at events and functions for industries running the gambit of the economy. In the same way media corporations can flex their muscles to block stories that would be financially damaging to their interests, reporters monetarily committed to an industry in scandal can choose how, or if, they want to report on the events. This once again provides for a less than realistic depiction of the news once it reaches the island that is the public.

The way in which reporters choose to cover and frame stories is a point of contention that will never be able to be fully squelched. People inherently have only a limited perspective on the events they cover because of the differences in every person’s life. As Gitlin agrees:

Media are mobile spotlights, not passive mirrors of the society; selectivity is the instrument of their action. A news story adopts a certain frame and rejects or downplays material that is discrepant. A story is a choice, a way of seeing an event that also amounts to a way of screening from sight (49).

Therefore, we must embrace framing for the context it brings to a story. As we saw in Images in Conflict, people reporting from different sides of a story, especially something as volatile and multifaceted as conflicts in the Middle East, are going to present stories to their audiences shown in a certain perspective. The same event will certainly have two (or more) very different meanings as it crosses media outlets. This is not a bad situation. The rub, however, is in how to get the largest amount of people to see the most perspectives on the same information.

Just as ownership economics was not a problem solely in the hands of media higher-ups, framing of stories does not completely fall under the discretion of the reporter. In circumstances both intentional and unintentional, the news is selected to fit the audience the media conglomerates intend to market to. However, these choices often largely reflect audiences who occupy the same socioeconomic status as those making the decisions.

The more closely the concerns and values of social movements coincide with the concerns and values of elites in politics and in media, the more likely they are to become incorporated in the prevailing news frames (Gitlin, 284).

As this persists, our culture gets closer and closer to what Gramsci would describe as hegemony. Those of elevated status are choosing what information we get as citizens. Just as Kovach and Rosenstiel discussed, the media cannot tell us how to think and feel, but they undoubtedly play a major role in what we are thinking about. Even the most conscientious person must defer some of their information gathering to those who make it their job. Otherwise, someone cannot hope to be informed on all the news of the day. Therefore, a certain amount of informational and cultural control is exerted over the people who form the popular opinions about events they are told to form them about.

Not only are we as a society forced to consume information given to us, we miss out on things that we are told we do not care about. This was illustrated no better than in the Missing Black Women and Doctors Without Borders videos. These are dynamic issues dealing with unequal coverage that people do want to hear about. The problem is if they are not reported on, we have very little chance to know about them.

This era has certainly come to be known as the Information Age for good reason. Never has information been so accessible and vital to our everyday lives. However, with this accessibility comes great responsibility for both those who provide it and those who consume it. Ironically, with all of this accessibility, have we conceded all initiative and trust to those who gather our news for us? What price do we pay for such convenience?

As media continues to consolidate and big business sustains the delusion of the inherent purpose of a news organization into simply another moneymaker, we as a culture and a new generation of executives and managers need to examine our decisions. The choices we make will shape the future of the business and the future of our society. It is silly to think large multi billion-dollar conglomerations will be quick to dismantle in the name of journalism. This is not even a guarantee for change. The change must come from those making the decisions everyday, now and in the future. And the change needs to come soon.

Unforgiven

In the case of structure points in David Webb Peoples’ Unforgiven, they appear to adhere very nicely to the classic dramatic structure of a screenplay. The inciting action that brings us into the story occurs on page eighteen. The Schofield Kid has already offered up the proposition to Munny, that being his share of $1000 when they kill the cowboys. Munny has been torn, but, here in this sequence, an exterior scene at the sod hut during the day, he at last decides to track down the Kid and take him up on the offer. He makes this decision based solely on the fact they his family is barely subsiding on the pig farm they currently hold together. He hates to see his children suffer, especially after their mother has already passed. He mounts his horse with a measured amount of difficulty, and rides off leaving Will and Penny behind.

The complications begin on page 41 with and exterior, stream bed, day shot. Currently, Munny and Ned are trailing the Kid, unbeknownst to him. The Kid begins to fire at them, as he is unaware of their identities as they could be anyone after the bounty he seeks. Luckily, Munny is able to talk enough sense into the Kid to get him to stop shooting long enough for the two men approach the Kid.
On page 48, an exterior, open country, day scene, Ned tricks the Kid into giving away that he has terrible eyesight. This is an unforeseen problem because Munny and Ned now know that, without his eyesight, the Kid will not be much of a shot from any distance.

The next two complications can be interpreted as one, as the second is dependant on the first. On page 59, an exterior, open country, day scene, the weather takes a turn for the worst as it begins to downpour. This causes Munny to become quite ill in on page 62, an exterior, train tracks, day scene. Despite Munny’s deteriorating condition health, the trio is able to make it into Big Whiskey.

Inside the bar on page 65, Munny runs into Little Bill, who demands he hand over his weapons. Munny is in no condition to put up a fight, and, although he denies that he has any firearms, is unable to protect himself when Little Bill beats him half to death for his deceit.

Munny is in very bad shape, but the women tend to him in a shed as he sleeps for three days on page 71 during an interior, shed, day scene. His condition is critical, but he is finally able to pull through on the third day and begins to regain his strength.

The men are able to start their hunt for the cowboys on page 80 in and exterior, box canyon, days scene, but problems arise when Ned is faced with the task of shooting Davey. He is unable to finish him off as he deems himself no longer cut out for the life of a bounty hunter. This forces Munny to step in to eliminate their target, even though he has not shot a man in over a decade. Still, he manages to shoot Davey in the gut before he ducks behind a rock face. This change in events, however, means that the pair will have to go the rest of the way without Ned, as he heads back home to Kansas. Only Munny and the Kid are left, setting up the final complication.

Munny and the Kid have tracked down Mike and he has left himself unguarded out in the outhouse. Munny leaves the kill to the Kid. He falters, freezing before all hell breaks loose when Fatty spots the Kid. Jolted into actions, the Kid finishes the job. Afterward, however, he breaks down in front of Munny, revealing that it was his first kill. He was not prepared for the impact it would have on him. This is a problem as the reversal comes into play, because Munny will have to do the work on his own.

The story seems to be wrapping up into a happy ending on page 102 in an exterior, open country, day scene, as Little Sue has delivered the money to Munny and the Kid. However, when Munny mentions Ned’s share, Little Sue reveals that Ned is dead, and his body is on display for all to see in front of Greeley’s as an example to those who plan treachery. This infuriates Munny, as Ned never killed any of the cowboys, but now has been punished for it. This event flips the direction of the story as Munny is now hell bent on revenge, instead of contently journeying back to his children on the pig farm.

The story rolls in to the climax as Munny enters Greeley’s on page 106 in an interior, bar room, night scene. He is drunk and looking for revenge. When his gun misfires, a shootout ensues. In the crossfire, Munny kills Little Bill and his four men single handedly. This is a thrilling and dramatic action sequence, highlighting the fierce and merciless character buried within Munny that we have only heard about through vignettes in the story. He prevails through a hail of gunfire.

On page 116 the denouncement ensues, as the scrawling text tells us that Munny was never heard from again, most likely having moved his family to California. The screenplay comes to a close with the same words that it started with: “And there was nothing on the stone to explain to Mrs. Feathers why her only daughter had married a know thief and murderer, a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition.”

WW Beauchamp is an interesting character in the screenplay, as although he is the most meek and feeble, in essence, he yields the most power. His books and ability to write are for sale throughout the screenplay. Through these books, he has the power to influence the way people act around him, because, ultimately, they all want a piece of him. Our first example of this behavior comes when we first meet Mr. Beauchamp in the train car with English Bob. English Bob is putting on a show for Beauchamp, playing with the unsuspecting passengers that challenge his shooting prowess and guile.

The only time that this ongoing show comes to halt is when the two encounter Little Bill at Big Whiskey, there to collect English Bob’s firearms. At this point, English Bob knows he is in trouble, but continues to keep his tough guise intact. When Little Bill finds out the WW is a writer, he is intrigued and we see his mannerisms also transform into that of a showmanship quality. He knows what kind of power WW possesses in spreading information and stories, therefore, he knows that he must make an example of English Bob, both to set an example and create his own legend. From then on, WW is never far from Little Bill’s side, as Little Bill revels in telling his own stories to WW, just as English Bob had.

WW does not care who tells him the stories, as his fantastic tales will sell no matter who they are about, but rather is more focused on siding with the person that will keep him alive. This is no more evident than at the climax of the screenplay when William Munny busts into Greeley’s looking for blood. Once Munny has dispatched of his enemies, he finds WW in the corner cowering in both fear and awe. When WW tells Munny that he is a writer, Munny decides he must make an impression on this man. Munny could have easily walked out of the establishment with very little in the way of theatrics, but chooses to dramatize the whole production for WW. When Munny is riding out of town, he announces to all those who will listen, but mainly to WW to solidify his legend, that if anyone should act up again, he will be back.

William Munny is the classic anti hero, that is, a fictional character who has some characteristics of a villain or an outsider, but is nevertheless portrayed somewhat sympathetically. We set up by the author initially to feel this way when the movie begins. We read the scrawling text across the screen: “Therefore, it was astonishing and heartbreaking to her mother that she would ever enter into marriage with William Munny, a know thief and murderer, a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition.” This is a sign to the audience that we will find out why Claudia would marry such man and that he must have some supremely redeeming qualities. Therefore, the audience is in a position to empathize with the character from the beginning, rather than waiting learn about his character through his actions in the story. As an audience, we are given character information to give us a preconceived notion that we are looking for something positive in this character. Also, through his actions on screen, we find that he regrets much of what has done in his past. His only reason for stirring old bones and going on the bounty hunt is that he needs the money to support his children. Therefore, we can sympathize with his cause, as his wife, the mother of his children, has died. The kids still look up to their father, as we are shown William Munny the father and provider, until the final climax where William Munny the cold blooded killer comes back to enact revenge. This helps the audience rationalize Munny’s actions, and their own sympathy towards his character.

Lyrics of the Day

Today’s selection comes from Lupe Fiasco’s latest album “Lupe Fiasco’s the Cool”. The lyrics to this song are very telling to for exploited children around the world. This is “Little Weapon”.

I killed another man today,
Shot him in his back as he ran away,
Then I blew up his hut with a hand grenade,
Cut his wife’s throat as she put her hands to pray,
Just five more dawgs then we can get a soccer ball, That’s what my commander say,
How Old?
Well Im like ten, eleven, been fightin since I was like six or seven,
Now I dont know much bout where Im from but I know I strike fear everywhere I come,
Government want me dead so I wear my gun, I really want the rocket launcher but Im still to
young, This candy give me courage not to fear no one, To fear no pain, and hear no tongue,
So I feel no pain, and I shed no tear, If Im in your dreams then your end is near.
Yeah

Forget it Jake. It’s Chinatown…

The term film noir is commonly understood by its literal translation of “black film”. Wikipedia.com describes film noir as: a style of film making creating a mood primarily associated with crime films that portray its principal character in a nihilistic and existentialist world. Obviously, in order to display such a bleak and foreboding world, typical features, such as dark brooding characters, corruption, detectives and the dark side of the big city, are used constantly.

Stylistically, film noir is classically black and white, employing dramatic shadows with stark contrast to emphasize the film’s dark nature. A vast majority of noir films have some element of murder that helps drive the plot, also implementing other dark situations into the fray, e.g. jealousy, greed, corruption, etc. Embroiled in these circumstances are characters that tend to fit into certain molds such as the femme fatale, hardboiled detective, and the corrupt policemen. Classic locations for these films include downtown New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco (imbd.com).

Neo-noir can be described as a film influenced by and reviving the style of film noir (dictionary.com) Therefore, since Chinatown is considered to be neo-noir, it was created in the style of traditional noir.

The dramatic hook in Chinatown occurs when the real Evelyn Mulwray enters Gittes’s office. During her visit, she reveals that the first Mrs. Mulwary was an imposter. The direct reference to this action in the screenplay appears on page 18, from scene 58. This scene is recognized as the hook because it changes the direction of the screenplay and sets up the rest of the action from here on out. Gittes thought originally that the case with Mulwray would be like many of his other cases, cut and dry. However, when Towne throws this hook into the story, Gittes realizes that he has been set up and he now must find out who double crossed him and why.

There are many examples of duplicitous actions throughout the screenplay, as the premise is built upon deception and deceit. One of the more interesting and important of these exchanges occurs when Gittes goes to see Noah Cross at his ranch. During scene 145 on page 63, Gittes sits down to eat with Cross as they discuss the death of Cross’s old partner, Hollis Mulwray. Cross begins to question Gittes about the police’s handling of the case, sparking a discussion about Escobar. After some rhetoric back and forth, Cross asks Gittes: “…but you’ve got no reason to think he’s bungled the case?” This question lacks any amount of innocence because Cross has got the police under a lot of pressure, including Lieutenant Escobar. Gittes’s answer to the question is also of a misleading nature as he says: “None.” In reality, Gittes knows that Escobar has decided not to further investigate the incident, calling it an accident. According to Escobar in scene 95, he is still bitter about the drowning accident that took the life of his cousin when the last dam built by Mulwray collapsed. However, as we learn along with Gittes, there is a suspicion that Escobar’s reasons had a deeper meaning could be linked with Cross and his plans for the valley.

This has importance in the dramatic progress of the story because now the audience understands that Cross is not an empty character in this screen play. Instead, he will be a major player by the end of the film and a necessary cog to its resolution. Also, Gittes now has a new piece of the mystery to bring into the puzzle of the case that he must resolve. Compounding the situation, Cross actually hires Gittes to find the “girl” (actually his daughter), giving Gittes another task to fulfill that will lead him toward the answers he seeks.

Water is both a strong visual element and a character in the film and screenplay. It can be acknowledged as a character because of the massive role that is plays in the progression of the story. For all intents and purposes, water is the story. From the very beginning when we think the film could be just a murder mystery, we are bombarded with water references: when Gittes finds out that Mulwray was head of the water department, when Mulwray is in the town meeting denouncing the dam, when he follows Mulwray down to the water runoff, and finally when Mulwray washes up in the reservoir drainage canal. The use of water in the story progression is used in scenes: 18-19, 22-48, 62, 65, 78, 85-87, 98, 100-113, 158-166, 211-213, and 225. As we can see, in most parts of the script the story does not advance 10 pages without some mention or appearance of water as a motif or theme. Not only do its multiple appearances garner the need to recognize it as a character, but the fact that water changes throughout the story forces us to think of it as a character. This can be demonstrated by how our perception of water within the context of the story evolves. In the beginning of the story, water just seems to be helping the action move along, but as Gittes gets deeper and deeper into the scandal, we find that the manipulation of water is the story. Therefore, without water the screenplay would not have its main character to drive the action forward.