Is popular culture reinventing language or simply appropriating it?

Have you ever thought about the origins of the words we use in everyday discussion? Well, neither have I…until recently. I found out that colloquial terms such as “yasss” and “slay” have been appropriated from Queer culture. More specifically, from the transgender community. This is a culture that has been disenfranchised and ridiculed for centuries, and its existence undermined by many. Literary critic and political activist Bell Hooks argues that many negative definition of the term drag “reconnect this label to an experience that is burdensome, as retrograde and retrogressive”[1]. Yet, here we are in the 21 century using their language, whilst continuing to delegitimise the queer culture. In the podcast Reply All, the host interviews ballroom “legend” Jose Xtravaganza. He is known for popularising voguing, and is one of the most famous personalities to emerge from the ballroom scene.

When asked for his opinion on the growing popularity and usage of “drag” vocabulary, Jose explains that for him, these terms are not simply words. He refers to them as “speaking code”, developed to prevent others from understanding their conversations. Jose further explains that the individuals who have invented the many colloquial terms have sadly passed away. For Jose these words embody the suffering and embarrassment his community had to endure. Arguably, the transgender community developed their own lexis to separate themselves from mainstream or hegemonic social conventions. Since, it is the very concept of societal norms that confine them to the realm of the other. Furthermore, there is something powerful about creating a language which other people will not be able to comprehend. This is significant for a community which lacks authority and recognition. Hooks describes their predicament in this manner:  “to choose to appear as “female”  when one is “male” is always constructed in the patriarchal mindset as a loss, as a choice worth only ridicule”[2]. The invention of a language which is being used constantly by straight or heterosexual individuals reinforces the irony embedded within this statement. On the one hand, many transgender individuals are mocked and humiliated for their choices. Yet, their language is popularised and turned into hashtags which circulated globally.

Therefore, popular culture has arguably given us access to the language of the queer community, and become a portal into a sub-culture which is becoming more and more prominent. It was because of a Lady Gaga fan the term “yasss” recognised as a term, and given an actual dictionary definition.

In this video, the fan can be heard articulating his adoration by shouting “yasss Gaga”, whilst  Lady Gaga poses for the camera outside a hotel. The young man is a member of the queer community, and this term functions as a marker of his identity. This video went viral, and initiated a surge in the usage of the word. It must also be noted that language also functions as a tool that can be used to construct identity.

In the documentary Paris is Burning,  the viewer encouters the fluid nature of identity. More specifically, the viewer is taken into the lives of homosexual and transgender individuals from Hispanic and African American descent. We are invited into the Ballroom, and experience a unique form of entertainment. The Ball has various categories in which one can compete in, and the winner is given a highly coveted price. Most of the categories include a form of dance or expression that must be mastered by the competitors. However, there is one peculiar subdivision entitled Realness, and inorfer to win the individual must embody a “straight” person they may have encountered. To put it plainly: “if you are gay, you have to go back into the closet”. This category may seem strange, and at first I was perplexed as well. Then, I slowly started to realise that by changing their appearance and mannerism, they are in fact ridiculing heterosexuality in the same manner homosexualitu is derided in mainstream depictions. Once again, this demonstrates the fluidity of identity categorization, a person’s attire and behaviour can determine whether or not they are recognised as gay or straight. Consequently, this also reaffirms the notion that identity is “capable of construction, invention and change”.

Returning to the function of popular culture in this dialectic between homosexuality and hertonormativity, I would also like to argue that popular culture has not only given us access to term such as “slay”. It also functions as a catalyst in the process of appropriating queer culture, as if it is accessible to all. On multiple social media platforms, individuals are utilising these neologism without knowing the sentiments attached to it. More importantly, all of these users are acknowledging and endorsing the existence of queer culture, some without being fully aware of this. A twitter user posted an image of a girl sobbing in response to seeing so many “heterosexual friends” use “yasss” on Facebook comments. This user felt as if his culture was finally being validated, and felt a sense of pride. For him this the lines between homosexuality and heterosexuality were being blurred. However, is this really the case when so many people are typing “yasss” in all caps without knowing that it was never intended for them to utilise.

[1] Bell Hooks, ‘Is Paris Burning?’, in Black Looks: Race and Representation, p. 146.

[2]Bell Hooks, ‘Is Paris Burning?’, in Black Looks: Race and Representation, p. 145.

Popular culture is a “Queer” thing in itself.

In this week blog, I will be considering how “queer” is represented in the media. In the 21^st century homosexuality, bisexuality and trans-sexuality is no longer confined to the realm of secrecy. Multiple movies and TV shows includes homosexual characters or have homosexual character in lead roles. More importantly, these characters are shown to have successful careers, find love and build families of their own. LGBT and other equal rights movements have not only raised awareness but have also appealed for the acceptance and tolerance of non-normative sexualities. Television has increasingly become a medium and space where homosexuality is being normalised as well as contested. For instance, sitcoms such as The Modern Family and The New Normal attempt to reinvent the image of a typical queer man. Furthermore, the titles of the shows use adjectives such as modern, new and normal to describe its content. In turn legitimising homosexuality as an ordinarily intrinsic part of contemporary American society.

 

Modern depictions have moved away from stereotypical characterisation of “gay” men. They are no longer solely feminine men or men mimicking what would be classed as feminine behavioural traits. The American-Canadian TV show, Queer as Folk has made significant contribution to altering popular media depiction of “gay” men. It first began on the 3rd of December 2000 and ended on the 7^th of August 2005. The show was based on the British TV series of the same name. More importantly, Queer as Folk was the first hour long drama depicting the lives of homosexual men and women. However, this show was not only ground-breaking for this reason. It attempted to demonstrate that individuals who identified themselves as homosexual or even transsexual could easily be identified as heteosexuals. For instance, the male characters on this show encountered everyday problems, and lived life like any other “normal” individual. If anything was presented as deviating from the norm, it was their choices in sexual partners. Homosexuality is not depicted as strange or fetishised. Instead, queer men are relatable, and given a space to challenge stereotypical popular depictions.

More to the point, in these portrayals whether “negative” or “positive” white homosexuality is accounted for in the media. Therefore, when watching even the most modern sitcoms, I am left with wondering what about black homosexual men?  I am mainly referring to men, because I have noticed this problem persistently in representations concerning homosexual men. Whether one examines 20th century depictions or current representation, Queer is still a white thing. White homosexual men are given the opportunity to reclaim their sexuality as normal, and acceptable. The issue of race is unacknowledged in most of these shows. The most important issue being addressed in these sitcoms and drama productions is sexuality, thus forgetting that race and sexuality for many people are interlinked. Author James Baldwin insisted that “race and sex must be approached as immutably interconnected and that homophobia was to be combated alongside racism”[1]. However, media representation of queer hesitate, and in many ways fail to account for black homosexual experiences.

This is why individuals such as Miss Lawrence from The Real Housewives of Atlanta are forced to leave TV shows, due disrespect. In an interview with BET, he explained that some of the women on the show did not respect the gay community, nor understand their situation. The fashion designer conveyed his issues in this manner:  “I don’t think they’re homophobic. What I’m saying is, they need to be held accountable for the cultural appropriation and they need to understand how to respect our culture – what’s appropriate to say and what’s not”[2]. Miss Lawrence was both hypervisible and invisible on a show where his race is dominantly represented. In other words, his sexuality turned him into a spectacle, he was both ridiculed and misunderstood.

This pattern of under-representation of black homosexual men is also evident on YouTube. There are numerous videos of people “coming out” (taking ownership of their sexuality), and yet again most of these videos have white protagonists. Their efforts are rightfully applauded and acknowledged. The Rhodes brothers uploaded a video on their channel entitled: Twins Come Out To Dad.  

In this video, the twin brothers candidly phone their father, and inform him that they are both homosexuals. Their struggles as white homosexual men are documented and rightfully validated through social media. This video has over 23 million views, and circulation has ensured that their story is watched and re-watched by people all over the world. The circulation of this video also encourages other people to “come out”, and share their experiences. Black homosexual men are not given the opportunity to achieve this through popular culture, as a result, they may not feel comfortable in engaging with discussion of sexuality on social media. They are doubly oppressed, and this remains unacknowledged by mainstream media.

(Note: I am aware that my post has neglected transsexuals and bisexual individuals. However, I have done this deliberately in order to focus on the lack of black homosexual male representation).

[1] James Baldwin’s Turkish Decade: Erotics of Exile, Magdalena Zaborowska.

[2] Link to interview: http://www.musictimes.com/articles/49078/20150924/miss-lawrence-left-rhoa-didnt-respect-gay-culture-token-guy.htm.

Caption this….

Sheila Heti’s novel How Should A Person Be explores what it means to be a truly autonomous individual in a world filled with expectations. She asks the reader to stop treating the self as an object, which requires constant revision. Heti strives to free the self from the pressure to conform and seek control. This is especially truthful in a society were social media has become a method of crafting an identity, and creating a persona which is unauthentic and somewhat forged. Heti approaches the self in a Heideggerian manner, and perceives it as something existential.

Furthermore, Heti treats identity as something that can be constructed throughout her novel. This can be inferred from the various memoirs written by the protagonist Sheila. For instance, she recollects walking through the park with her fiancé, and watching a couple exchange their vows. In this moment both Sheila and her fiancé are actively choosing to intrude, and become spectators. Sheila describes the bride as being overcome with emotions as she said the words for richer or for poorer. She agrees with her fiancé in thinking that this reaction from the  bride was “materialistic, stupid and vain”. However, upon further consideration they both acknowledge that they should not be judgmental. This moment may seem insignificant to the reader, and we may wonder why Sheila decides to share this event. It is the direct correlation between this incident and her wedding day which gives this passage meaning.

Sheila describes her own wedding day, as the day she dreaded yet eagerly awaited. She recalls that she was now the bride in front of an audience, and it was her turn to make the same vows. However, something “strange” occurs as she says the words for richer or for poorer, tears well in her eyes and her voice cracks. In this moment, the protagonist does not only mimic the bride (from the park), but also usurps her identity. She performs every word identically, as if possessed by the other woman. Sheila explains her action in this manner: “I felt none of it. It was a copy, a possession canned. That bride inhabited me […] it was like I was not there at all-it was not me”.  Sheila behaved in the manner she believed a bride should without considering her own emotions. As a result, this moment seems scripted. It appears constructed and planned. Therefore, transgressing the boundaries between reality and fiction, and this is something Heti repeatedly achieves throughout the course of the narrative. The reader is forced to ask: is this real?

The compulsion to replicate popular behaviour, and adhere to the norm is evident in our current selfie culture. Many users upload similar selfies with identical captions, and post duplicate comments. Sometimes even capturing meaningless and unauthentic moments to either garner many likes. Therefore, for many of these users it is all about creating a persona other people will admire, and ensuring that their images adhere to other users expectations.

Recently, travel blogger Lauren Bullen found out that one of her followers was replicating every travel image she posted on Instagram. This user mindlessly imitated someone else in an attempt to conform. According to The Mirror, when Lauren confronted the impostor online, she received a telling response. The impostor claimed that “everyone” copied and if this bothered her, then she should have made her account private. This suggest that if an image is posted in the public realm, it no longer belongs solely to its original owner. This image is now also owned to the millions of users who have access to it. In Heti’s novel we can find an explanation for this compulsion to engage with the popular, either by recreating or appropriating it.

“if there’s a pool and people are in the pool and you’re not in the pool, you want to be in the pool just like those people in the pool. It’s just a fact of nature.”-

The above quote captures the modern problem of “fitting in”, a desire to participate and become involved in anything that may elevate the social status of the self. This novel lurks between the boundaries of real life and art. It does not answer the question it proposes in its title, instead it seeks to re-frame and rework the manner in which this question is currently being answered.

To conclude, another pertinent issue raised by both Heti and the controversy on Instagram is the problem of ownership. I am forced to ask this question: who owns an image once it is posted online? Some may argue that the individual who originally took the photograph or selfie is the primary and sole owner of it. On the other hand, other will state that once the image has been posted on a public sharing space such as Instagram, it belongs to all the users who have access to it. This is the response Lauren received from her cyber stalker. The lines between public and private are significantly blurred.

Significantly, social media users are encouraged to believe that the online space is like their own sanctuary, a safe place to post intimate selfies or words. Take Myspace for example, the very name (Myspace) suggest that the webpage belongs to only the user. However, in reality millions of other users can access your page, and take your content without your permission. This is why I regularly encounter articles inviting you to take a look at Taylor Swifts old my Space account. In the real world, you would probably be sued and face the possibility of obtaining a criminal record. To be specific your crime would be described as theft. However, online rules are not as distinct, and you can probably earn millions by taking what simply does not belong to you, and claiing ownership over it.

 

(Link to the article: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/instagram-star-finds-ridiculously-creepy-9261254).

The selfie-culture: women, selfies and public shaming.

In 2013 the term “selfie” was named by Oxford Dictionaries as the word of the year. Its rise in popularity stemmed from its continual usage on social media platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter. Celebrities, Presidents, Prime Ministers and “ordinary” people all indulge in the activity of taking selfie. So what does this neologism actually mean? The OED defines the informal noun “selfie” as “a photograph that one has taken of oneself, typically with a smartphone or webcam and uploaded to a social media website”. This act has become a modern craze with mobile phone manufactures targeting its buyers with incentives such as free “selfie-sticks” and sharper camera resolution. Freud would argue that inherent narcissistic tendencies within every social being is the reason for the emergence of the selfie culture. Arguably, self exhibition has become the focal point of human interaction.

This social phenomenon invites analysis, as many selfies have been at the centre of news making headlines. For instance, Kim Kardashian is notorious for her ability to take “perfect” selfies. She uses the selfie as a form of expression. However, on multiple occasions the selfies she posts are interpreted as feminist statements, even though her intentions may solely be to exhibit. In 2017, Kim posted a picture of herself naked on Twitter, captioned: When you’re like I have nothing to wear LOL. She had presumably taken the selfie in the comfort of her own bathroom. The image shows Kim (naked) holding her smart phone (to capture the moment), whilst pouting in front of a mirror. The very act of taking the picture is visibly embedded within the selfie. The intimate parts of her body censored with two strips. For Kim the selfie may have symbolised a moment of overcoming and celebration. However, once she posted the image online, the backlash she received was astonishing. She was publicly slut-shamed, and slammed as a terrible mother for posting pictures of herself nude. Within hours of posting the image, news outlets were discussing the appropriateness of the image, debating whether or not Kim had “crossed the line”. The problem Kim and many social media users face is that once an image is posted on the web it cannot be retrieved, it is out there for everyone to see and scrutinise. The line between public and private no longer exists. Additionally, the selfie-culture has multiple informal rules in regards to posting pictures. Users are able to post pictures of themselves regularly without constrain. However, the “appropriateness” of each image is policed by the same users who also participate in the act of posting images.

It must be noted that not everyone was critical of Kim’s selfie. Many people saw Kim as the victim of online slut-shaming, and slammed journalists such as Piers Morgan for their mysoginist views. According to many, Kim had the right to take ownership of her own body, and post nude images without being criticised. Twitter users compared Kim’s selfie to the image of Justin Bieber bearing his buttocks. Both images depicted similar content, yet Justin Bieber was praised for his “sizzling abs” and “cute butt”. The public’s reaction reinforces and magnifies the social issue of double standards. The selfie becomes a medium to question social attitudes and initiate discourse. In other words, social media becomes a space to reinvent gender expectation, and “create a radical new aesthetics of the female body”.

Derek Conrad Murray sees the social media as a sphere where political activism can take place. He argues that “young self-proclaimed feminists negotiate this space for political action”. This is evident in the Kim Kardashian controversy. She used her controversial selfie to write an essay on slut-shaming, and embracing female sexuality. Kim expressed her astonishment in an interview stating; “they have seen me naked like 500 times and the censor bar literally was probably more covering than a bikini. I could not grasp why people were still outraged”. The image that was supposed to be celebration of Kim’s post maternity body. Instead it was transformed into a statement which challenged sexist ideologies and protested against slut-shaming.

I cannot help but wonder, if women are still being subjected to distasteful insults online has feminism truly achieved all of its objectives?

Feminism: a glance through the lens of popular culture.

I will attempt to answer the following questions: what does it mean to be a modern feminist? More importantly, what does she look like according to popular culture? Well let me start by stating, contemporary depictions (at least the ones that I readily encounter) suggest that she is stylish, independent, hardworking and makes all her own choices. She is feminine, but not too “girly”. A move away from pink loving entrepreneur, Elle Woods, played by Reese Witherspoon in Legally Blonde. Someone more like Jules Ostin (from the movie: The Intern) fits the new prototype of a modern feminist. This woman is depicted as the quintessential all-encompassing 21^st century women. She is a successful entrepreneur, a mother and a loyal wife. She embodies these figures and navigates through her duties without compromising with her desires, or at least this is what we are led to believe. The character of Jules seems to persuade the viewers that feminism is bound up with choice. In other words, a truly free and independent women should be able to do whatever she wants without feeling the need to apologise. For instance, Jules sternly decides  by the end of the film, to choose her business and make a decision that could be interpreted as a selfish one. This leads me on to the second adjective (selfish) scarcely used but always implied in representations of feminists. Women of today (like Jules) should be able to make choices which truly only benefit them, if this is what they desire. Individualism is at the heart of these types of depictions. The human is presented as an individual with respective needs, rather than as a member of collective cohort with the same desires and requirements.

Nudity is now also seen as a choice. Kim Kardashian posting nude selfies just because she can, is an example of this. However, the backlash that she received from people indicates the work that still needs to be done in order to eliminate double standards, and misogyny.

The notion of choice is reinforced in the perfume adverts such as Paco Rabanne’s Lady Million. It depicts model, Dree Hemmingway obtaining items of her desire by a snap of her fingers. As wishful as this might sound, this advert has over 2 million hits on YouTube, and has achieved its function of luring women into stores. Despite its many flaws, the Paco Rabanne advert underlines post-feminist ideologies. More specifically, the notion of a modern woman being able to attain through her own will and abilities (in this case by the snap of the fingers). This post-feminist message may have appealed to the consumers, as the onus is placed on the individual, and the problem of gender is eradicated. Popular culture is turned into a platform where feminist ideas are contested and transformed.

Even though, many Hollywood feminist interpretation are moving towards this representation, there are still movies and music videos depicting feminists as man-hating, aggressive and “bitchy” women. Rob Kardashian compares Kim Kardashian to Amy Dunne (the psychotic killer from Gone Girl) in a social media exchange. Posting this picture:

This may have been a “heat off the” moment Instagram post for Rob Kardashian. To me, this was a significant moment in revealing the stigmas a successful modern woman faces. She is scary, and depicted in this manner by many. If you turn on your electronic device and type the term “feminist” in google, the first image that is generated is of Chanty Binx. She is also known as Big Red. Binx is known for her expletive filled response to men’s rights activist group.

This video has over a million hits on YouTube, and the comment section is filled with anti feminism rhetoric. For instance, one comment suggests that Binx has dyed her hair with “men’s blood”, and another person describes feminism as a “hate group”. Unfortunately, this is another dominant image of feminists circulating in the realm of pop-culture. Arguably, a social movement that began in order to fight for gender equality is slowly being turned into a hate movement. Furthermore, according to these example, popular culture has the ability to diminish the importance of feminism in contemporary society. Many understand feminism as an anti-male movement which restrains women, and are advocating its irrelevancy. The meaning and significance of feminism is being revised and contested. The overarching question which is being disputed is whether or not feminism is still necessary.

The importance of feminism in modern society is even more susceptible to criticism,  as it is now become “fashionable” to endorse this movement. Many celebrities are using feminist ideologies to explain their actions, and this is arguably devaluing its historical significance. Political activist Germaine Greer publicly criticised Taylor Swift and her “squad” for overusing this term for their personal gain.This urges the question: is popular representation having an adverse effect on all the achievements of feminists, suffragettes and social activists?

Citizen: an American lyric: Rankine’s understanding of human interactions.

In one of my previous blogs, I explored the relationship between race and media representations. I explained how Surya Bolany’s experience as a black athlete was significant in understanding the media’s ability to shape black identity.Now, I would like to further explore how media representations are influencing our understanding of race. However, before I embark on this venture, it is significant to remember that the viewer does not passively consume message from the media (as discussed by Stuart Hall). The individual uses their own experiences to decode the meaning behind the message. Consequently, an individual of colour watching Serena William’s angry “outburst” may feel a shared sense of frustration. Since their daily interactions with the other race may invoke similar reactions. This is something a viewer who has never experienced racism may not be able to appreciate or understand. Rankine’s Citizen: An American Lyric recognises this, and attempts to highlight the state of mind of the many people subjected to racist remarks.

Citizen: An American Lyric delves into the inner psyche of the racialized other. She explores the troubles, self-doubt and feelings of paranoia suffered by African Americans (note:her discourse is not solely confined to this racial group). This is refreshing, as most conversations surrounding race try to explain why or understand how. Rankine seeks to reveal to the reader the emotional conflict and turmoil experienced by black people. She achieves this by demonstrating a link between words and the effect they have on the receiver. More specifically, the effects of being either invisible or hypervisible in a white world. Rankine refers to the “quotidian struggles against dehumanization every black or brown person” faces. The term “quotidian” indicates that this struggle occurs daily and is therefore experienced in everyday life. The multiple vignettes recreate the recurrent problems encountered by individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds.She argues that emotions such as anger are believed to be linked solely to the performance of blackness, rather than the actual emotional state of the individual.

Tracie Hunt (in the podcast for Radiolab)  attempts to understand the feelings of paranoia black people may experience, as a result of racism. She proclaimes:

“I can’t imagine what it must be like, well I can imagine what it must be like, well, on that scale. To be the only one. And there is this, I think, for, you know, a friend of mine once told me that racism can make black people crazy. Which is a very broad way of looking at it. In the sense that you kind of almost never know why people are reacting to you the way they do. […] It can make you feel a little paranoid, a little crazy”.

The root causes of these feelings of paranoia are explained by Rankine through various real-life interactions between both races. For instance, she describes a hypothetical conversation between two colleagues:

“Despite the fact that you have a sabbatical schedule as everyone else, he says, you are always on a sabbatical. you are friends so you respond, easy

what do you mean?

Exactly, what do you mean?”

From this conversation it can be deduced that the imagined individual is somewhat troubled by their friend’s remark. Therefore, he/she assumes that the words may have been censured, anticipating a meaning that has not been fully articulated or hidden. This elicits the response easy, as if expecting a confrontation. The individual (presumably black) does not fully understand why they have responded in this manner, but knows this is not the first time a comment like this has been made towards her/him.

Similar assumptions were made by Serena Williams when she was foot faulted on a crucial point. She believed that she was being “robbed” from the opportunity to win her match. Importantly, this is the first presumption she makes, despite the fact that other reasons may have forced the line judge to intervene.Rankine suggests that Serena’s reaction was not caused by losing a point unfairly. Instead, this moment has embedded in it multiple moments of frustration. In other words, her anger is a response to an accumulation of similar occurrences. Rankine opens up this moment to scrutinise it’s significance, and demonstrating the weight of history attached to it. Serena could be likened to a tortured caged animal, subjecting its owner to the suffering it endured. Her comment: “‘If I could, I’d take this ball and shove it down your throat”, was interpreted by the line judge as “I am going to kill you”. Serena was left defending herself extensively, denying those words ever came out of her mouth. William’s comment could be interpreted as a form of  displacement. Freud would argue that Serena in that moment expressed a desire to silence people that have subjected her to racism. Just like they have tried to silence her over the years.

Despite all the fame and success she has achieved Williams still has episodes of paranoia were she warns the umpire or line judge not to start on her, even though they are simply informing her that the ball was indeed out.

Citizen: An American lyric as a book defies the conventions of literature. It can be described as poetry, criticism, or even a political essay. Rankine constant use of art can be interpreted as a method of illuminating the words on the page. An attempt to extent the meaning prescribed to every word she uses beyond the page. Arguably within any work of art the creator’s personal and cultural experiences are hidden. Therefore by including artists’ works in her book, Rankine adds their personal struggles and experiences to that of her own. Their is a sense of universality and collectiveness to the issues of race that she explores. Race is no longer an individual problem, it is an issue perpetuated by interactions between two racial groups. Furthermore, Rankine acknowledges that racial prejudice and suffering is widespread, but is also aware that her readership will not have a common cultural experience. Zidanze outburst (head-butting Materazzi) was similar to Serena’s “antics” on the tennis court. Both of these athletes come from a distinctly separate cultural background, and are not of the same sex.  They are united nonetheless by their frustration, and sense of confinement. Both of these athletes are being trussed into a racialised discourse.

Additionally, the deliberate  use of the pronoun “you” in multiple prose narrating experiences of black people, suggests that she wants the reader to embody the pronoun, and imagine themselves in the same situation. A black reader may feel like these instances mimick his/her own experiences. Therefore, they may easily and comfortably assume this role. On the other hand, a white reader may feel out of place trying to imitate or become the other, since their experiences differ. The pronoun urges the reader to assume both roles in an imaginary encounter, and allow Rankine to demonstrate the inherent tensions that exists between being invisible and hypervisible.

Rechnology-an intertwining of race and technology.

Race as technology is a metaphor that widens the connotations of racial identification. Wendy Chun chooses to disseminate modern and historical perception of race by demonstrating the profound relationship between technology and race. Chun argues against the notion that race is “purely biological”. A biological definition of race suggests that “visible traces of the body are tied to allegedly innate invisible characteristics”. In other words, an individual’s appearance is intrinsically bound up with their inner characterisation. Chun firmly opposes this, and identifies the need to look beyond the colour of an individual’s skin, and acknowledge the differences that exist within each and every one of us.

For Chun the only way the power of racism can be undone is by denaturalizing race. More specifically, “to loosen the connection between the bodily sign of race and what it signifies”. This indicates that Chun wants race to be no longer seen as something innate, and biologically determined. She seeks to extend the definition of race allowing it to account for individual differences. Race should not be something redundant and simplistic, Chun recognises this and repeatedly complicates our understanding of the term. However, it is not enough to come to the consensus that race signifies more than the colour of one’s skin. Some critics have replaced the term biology with culture in an attempt to pragmatically redefine the noun to fit modern standards of identification. Chun suggests that race should not be understood as “purely biological” or “purely cultural”. This is because race has always been a mix of science, art, and culture.

Moreover, she incorporates historical struggles of race into her argument. Thus, mapping the evolution race through time. Chun focuses much of her discussion on significant historical events such as the Holocaust and the Civil Rights Movement in the US. These events demonstrates how race and technology are intertwined. The era of slavery in the USA was confounded with racial ambivalence. The term was used to group an entire population of people, and to account for the existence of a racialized other without acknowledging their humanity. Chun describes segregation as a “racial techonology” that created “stark racial differences” where none existed. According to her, this allowed for the myth of absolute racial difference to excel, and ensured that “blacks” were always seen as slaves. Segregation was a way of retaliating against the blurred social and racial lines invoked by technology itself. Chun makes use of Hale’s observation to further explain her preposition. Hale suggested that whiteness was signified by first class trains in the nineteenth century. This space was intruded by wealthy middle class blacks, who entered the “semi-public sphere” wearing smart attire. The public isolation of these two opposing racial divisions diminished, and this in turn incited confusion. Consequently, segregation was used to prevent technology from allowing people of colour to escape their history. To state it plainly segregation was used to produce and cultivate difference.

The music video Many Moons by Janelle Monae can be seen as a modern attempt to redefine racial standards. It can especially be interpreted as an effort to use technology as a method of renegotiation. Janelle takes an image that has been circulating for many years (slave auctioning) and utilises it to problematise the representation of race. This video juxtaposes runway modelling with auction bidding in an attempt to re-enact slave auctioning in the US. Monae embodies multiple personas, one of them being Cindy Mayweahter, the performer. Whilst numerous incarnations of Monae walk the runway in various attires, white bourgeoisie clients bid for these commodities on display. This process is conducted in a futuristic setting with Monae’s characters resembling human robots. Monae is using the platform of music to recreate history, and challenge modern perceptions of race. She is not only inserting herself into a moment in history that has been used by racist technology repeatedly to spread false ideologies, she is also dictating as an artist how this moment is redefined in a contemporary setting. Additionally, racial struggle is being transformed into a form of art that is accessible to many, and which has been created from the view point of the subjugated individual.

The striking scene at the end of the video of Mayweather being electrocuted may be Monae’s way of capturing the pain and torture her ancestors have suffered as colonial subjects and slaves. This imagery also reinforces the notion that the black body was for so long synonymous with aggression, suffering and degradation. The African body is presented to the viewer as a site of struggle. By allowing an historical event to take place in the future, Monae could be asking the viewer to question whether freedom has actually been attained post-civil rights movement, and opens up this discourse to viewers of all colour.

Furthermore, this music video arguably also anticipates a return of racial conflict. This is significant as this work of art was released in 2008. The year in which America elected its first ever black president (Barack Obama). For many this event marked a new era in American political history, however Monae could be reminding the public of the impact slavery has had on the American conceptualisation of race.

The media and race representations: can we truly escape stereotypical ideologies?

I was enthralled by the podcast entitled ‘On the Edge’ (by Radiolab). The topic of discussion was the story of Surya Bonaly. The rebellious Figure Skater. The tumbling star gone rogue. Her story captures the predicament that many women of colour still face today. Her talents were undermined simply because of the colour of her skin. Surya was born in Nice, and from African descent. She always dreamed of being a successful figure skater. She worked hard, and finally made it onto the world stage. However, her arrival was marred with hostility and negativity.

At first, the commentators and general public were drawn to her, because she was different from all the other female skaters. She challenged the conventional image of a sport which was defined by elegance, artistry and beauty. On the surface, this sudden rise to notoriety could be perceived as something positive. However, the attention Surya was receiving (at that time) was not in any way due to her unique unorthodox talents. Even though, she was a naturally athletic and gifted skater. The world was captivated by  “the contrast of her skin on the ice”. A politer way of saying: OMG, she is black. All the other skaters were white “beautiful” girls, and this turned Surya into (what Simone de Beavioure would term) the Other.  The world’s reaction reinforced this. She seemed as absurd to them as Victor’s creation, Frankenstein. Soon ignorant and ridiculous rumours started to spread about her. For instance, it was believed that she was adopted from a coconut farm in Africa. Her diet consisted solely of bird seeds, and she never cut her hair.

.

In other words, she was seen by many as an alien. Nothing more than a spectacle. As laughable as this may seem, this was the reaction of the media at the time. Surya’s team perpetuated these rumours, explaining that the world wanted to believe this narrative. More specifically, these were ideas already circulating, and her team endeavored to solidify these misconceptions by repeatedly sending the same messages to the public. This suggests that a truth can be constructed through repetition. However, does this mean as viewers or receivers we are more likely to consume messages without decoding, if the message is constantly repeated?

An influential sport critique explained that the problem with Surya was that she was not “artistic” in her style. In an interview, she proclaimed “everything about skating is built on circles”. Therefore, her problem with Surya was that she skated on a “straight line”. Her style was not only unorthodox, but she also sounded uncanny on the ice. The main critique she received was that she was not “graceful” like the other female skaters. This narrative was continuously repeated, and used to distract the viewers from the actual problem. Her race. The term “athletic” was used over and over again to diminish her natural ability. This adjective became her identity. The phrase “too muscular” defined her aesthetically. Does this narrative not remind you of the current predicament facing sports women like Simone Biles, Serena William and Venus Williams?  Can they not be seen as the modern equivalents of Surya? The real issue is that black women will never be seen as “normal”. Many talented, beautiful and gifted black women are caged by racist, demeaning and insulting labels.

Memes such as these found readily on the web epitomize the dominant attitude towards black women. The term “masculine” is thrown at athletic black women, and their femininity is undermined. Barbaric associations made with their physical features, and this has a negative impact on the way black people view themselves.

All these women are unable to escape the constrains of their race. Surya’s actions are seen as deviant, even though her intentions are to solely express herself. for instance, the infamous “back flip”  was described by many as “a middle finger to the establishment”. However, for Surya the meaning of this acrobatic gesture was a claim of ownership. The media’s ability to create “good” and “bad” images is prevalent and evident in the representation of Surya. Writer and social activist Bell Hook discusses the concept of constructing images, and how this influences perception.

“For some time now the critical challenge for black folks has been to expand the discussion of race and representation beyond debates about good and bad imagery. Often what is thought to be good is merely a reaction against representations created by white that were blatantly stereotypical”.  -Bell Hooks

According to Hook, the issue is no longer about turning bad images into positive ones, because even the “good” images are polluted with stereotypical colonial ideas. These images are reactionary, and do not resist popular representation. Consequently, in order to expand racial discussions beyond the restrains of good and bad, one must actively challenge and transform images created on the basis of colonial ideology. Hook presents the media as a site of struggle between positive and negative images, and seeks to end this ancient and tiresome battle. It is time to challenge images such as “the angry black woman”, which is still used to undermine black people’s emotions. Even Michelle Obama has expressed a sense of exhaustion in regards to this matter, after she was subjected to media criticism for her “angry resting face”.

We are not passive consumers of Popular-Culture or Literature, thank you very much.

Stuart Hall in Notes on Deconstructing the Popular[1] discusses how media messages are produced, circulated and consumed. Hall suggests that the act of consuming popular culture is not passively conducted. He refutes the view that the masses consume mindlessly. I believe he accurately describes the modern process of viewing. Think about it like this, when we are watching our favourite television series, we don’t just sit there blankly staring at the screen. As viewers, we respond to the messages being transmitted on the TV screen. Hall refer to this process as “decoding”, and argues that an individual’s response is influenced by their social and cultural background. For instance, some of us may simply decide to cry in a corner, and morn our favourite character’s death. While, others may turn to social media to express their outrage, or directly contest the original content by creating an elaborate piece of fan-fiction. This piece of fan-fiction may circulate around the web, and begin a mass movement. This is what happened after viewers of The Walking Dead noticed a “connection” between Rick and Michonne. Fan-fictions started to be produced, one of which the AMC producers must have read. Since, “Richonne” is no longer living in the imaginary realm. That’s right, they are now official, and I could not be happier.

I would like to argue that this same process of “decoding” is used when analysing literature. As a student of English Literature, I am constantly critically examining texts, and responding to the original text by writing essays on my findings. I am not passively reading numerous pages of writing (in other words, I am not a robot). I see myself as a decoder of literature. I also believe that contemporary pop-culture can be analysed in order to gain a critical understanding of the social conventions, practices and beliefs it claims to depict. Similarly, one can scrutinise a novel to obtain an insightful understanding of the same concepts. I will come back to this point later in my post.

For now, I want to discuss another observation that many of you may have already made as individuals living in the 21^st century. Our lives are saturated with content denoting popular-culture. To prove this, I will make use of a short narrative relaying the events that may occur on a hypothetical Saturday morning.

You wake up in the morning, and flex your muscles in attempt to shake off the worries of yesterday. While doing this, your phone vibrates informing you of new: Facebook, Instagram or Twitter notifications. A quick smile spreads across your face, and you strictly tell yourself: I am only going to quickly check my notification, no more than 10 minutes. Two hours later, the sound of your stomach churning distracts you. To combat the hunger demons, you rush into the kitchen and pick up a box of cereal. As you are eating, you cannot help but notice the striking promotional offer (half-price cinema tickets) on the box. This initiates a day-dream involving you going to see the new Tom Cruise movie: Jack Reacher: Never Go Back. After satisfying your morning craving, you pick up the television remote, and turn on the TV. This is a habitual thing, an instantaneous action. The first channel you tune into is advertising a re-run of Friends on another channel from the same network. Can anybody resist watching Friends? You find the channel only to be stalled from watching an episode by advertisements. One of them being the trailer of Jack Reacher 2.

 

I hope by intertwining popular culture and literature, I have convincingly made my point. It is everywhere.  So, is it not acceptable to argue that modern day conversations reflect this? The language we use to communicate is already filled with clichés. Now, we cannot refrain from making references to popular culture in our everyday speech, since we are surrounded by signs and symbols representing various mediums of entertainment. In the last couple of days how many times have you asked any of the following questions to a friend or relative: so, have you watched any good shows recently?/ did you watch the latest episode of_? This may explain why novelists are including pop-culture references in their work. I am an avid reader of contemporary realist novels, and I have noticed countless references to movies, TV shows and celebrities. This is permissible since a realist novel is “a type of novel that places a strong emphasis on the truthful representation of the actual in fiction. […] The materials [the writer] elects to describe are the common, the average, the everyday.”[2] Therefore, the conversations that occur between characters mirror those that occur in real life.

The excerpt above is taken from Dana Spoitta’s novel Innocent and Others. When I first read it, I felt like I was eavesdropping on an actual conversation. Therefore, novelists may decide to include references to popular culture in their work to truthfully recreate reality in their fiction.

[1] Hugh Hollman, A Handbook to Literature.

[2] Stuart Hall, Encoding/Decoding.