Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Health

Hey there. 2BA/2's class will be entirely based on the first article below while 2BA/3's class will be partially based on the same article plus a presentation based on the one underneath:

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/10/us-women-are-dying-younger-than-their-mothers-and-no-one-knows-why/280259/

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/03/news/la-bx-hero3-2010feb03

We also need to think about final exam questions for pop culture, so please start thinking about these please.


U.S. Women Are Dying Younger Than Their Mothers, and No One Knows Why

While advancements in medicine and technology have prolonged life expectancy and decreased premature deaths overall, women in parts of the country have been left behind.


(jessiejacobson/flickr)
The Affordable Care Act took a major step toward implementation last Tuesday with the launch of the online insurance exchanges, limping across the finish line despite three years of Republican obstruction that culminated in this week’s 11th hour attempt to dismantle the law by shutting down the federal government.
It’s easy to forget, amid the hyper-partisan controversy, that the main purpose behind President Obama’s signature health-care reform law is not to curtail individual freedom or send senior citizens to death panels, but to give more Americans access to health insurance. Whether you think the Affordable Care Act is the right solution or a dangerous step toward tyranny, it’s hard to dispute that the U.S. health-care system is broken. More than 48 million people lack health insurance, and despite having the world’s highest levels of health-care spending per capita, the U.S. has some of the worst health outcomes among developed nations, lagging behind in key metrics like life expectancy, premature death rates, and death by treatable diseases, according to a July study in the Journal of the American Medicine Association.

For some Americans, the reality is far worse than the national statistics suggest. In particular, growing health disadvantages have disproportionately impacted women over the past three decades, especially those without a high-school diploma or who live in the South or West. In March, a study published by the University of Wisconsin researchers David Kindig and Erika Cheng found that in nearly half of U.S. counties, female mortality rates actually increased between 1992 and 2006, compared to just 3 percent of counties that saw male mortality increase over the same period.

“I was shocked, actually,” Kindig said. “So we went back and did the numbers again, and it came back the same. It’s overwhelming.”

Kindig’s findings were echoed in a July report from University of Washington researcher Chris Murray, which found that inequality in women’s health outcomes steadily increased between 1985 and 2010, with female life expectancy stagnating or declining in 45 percent of U.S. counties. Taken together, the two studies underscore a disturbing trend: While advancements in medicine and technology have prolonged U.S. life expectancy and decreased premature deaths overall, women in parts of the country have been left behind, and in some cases, they are dying younger than they were a generation before. The worst part is no one knows why.

[IMAGE DESCRIPTION]
(Health Affairs/The Population Institute, University of Wisconsin)
The Kindig study does note strong relationships between county mortality rates and several cultural and socioeconomic indicators. In particular, location appears to have an outsized effect on mortality rates. Counties with rising female mortality rates, marked in red, paint a broad stroke across Appalachia and the Cotton Belt, moving across to the Ozarks and the Great Plains. The Northeast and the Southwest, on the other hand, have been largely untouched.

But it’s not clear how these geographical differences play a role in mortality, or why the effect would be so much greater on women than on men. “Clearly something is going on,” Kindig said. “It could be cultural, political, or environmental, but the truth is we don’t really know the answer.”

Other researchers have pointed out the correlation between education rates and declining female health outcomes. The most shocking study, published in August 2012 by the journal Health Affairs, found that life expectancy for white female high-school dropouts has fallen dramatically over the past 18 years. These women are now expected to die five years earlier than the generation before them—a radical decline that is virtually unheard of in the world of modern medicine. In fact, the only parallel is the spike in Russian male mortality after the fall of the Soviet Union, which has primarily been attributed to rising alcohol consumption and accidental death rates.

“It's unprecedented in American history to see a drop in life expectancy of such magnitude over such a short time period,” said Jay Olshansky, the lead author of the study. “I don't know why it happened so rapidly among this subgroup. Something is different for the lives of poor people today that is worse than it was before.”

Education alone does not explain why female high-school dropouts are so much worse off than they were two decades ago. But researchers have used it as a proxy to determine more significant socioeconomic indicators, like access to health care and income opportunities, as well as health behaviors like smoking and obesity. Smoking in particular appears to have had a significant impact on female mortality rates, as the health consequences of previous decades of tobacco use set in. Olshansky points out that female obesity and drug abuse have risen dramatically over the past two decades, and may also play a role in mortality rates.

Researchers are hopeful that the expansion of health-care coverage under the Affordable Care Act will help ameliorate some of the health risks for poor and uneducated women. But access to health insurance is only part of the puzzle—in fact, Kindig’s study found that medical care factors had no discernible impact on death rates at the county level. “Health care is far from the whole story,” Kindig told me. “More and more people are beginning to realize that the non-health-care factors are at least as important.”

In May, Jennifer Karas Montez, a social demographer who studies health inequalities, co-authored a study that was the first to investigate how quality of life might be playing a role in the early deaths of female high-school dropouts. Montez found that while smoking accounts for half of the decline in life expectancy among these women, whether or not a woman has a job is equally significant. “Women without a high-school degree have not made inroads in the labor force, especially in post-recession America,” Montez said in an interview. In fact, only one-third of women without a high-school diploma are employed, compared to half of their male counterparts, and nearly three-quarters of better-educated women. When they are employed, Montez said, it is usually in low-wage jobs that offer no benefits or flexibility. Smoking and other destructive behaviors, she added, may just be symptoms of the heightened stress and loneliness experienced by women who don’t graduate from high school.

“Life is different for women without a high-school degree than it was a few decades ago, and in most cases it’s a lot worse,” she said. “It’s really just a perfect storm.”

'Avatar' is a Pandora's box of pop culture

February 03, 2010|By BY GEOFF BOUCHER

Remember when "Avatar" was just a movie? There have been breathless reports that "Avatar" is so vivid and so powerful that moviegoers walk out feeling let down by the gray world here on boring old Terra.

"Movie-goers feel depressed and even suicidal at not being able to visit utopian alien planet" may sound like a headline from the Onion but, nope, there it was in the Daily Mail of London and, a day earlier, on CNN, which quoted a forum post by someone named Mike who glumly said that the majesty of the movie has left him feeling, um, blue. "I even contemplate suicide thinking that if I do it I will be rebirthed in a world similar to Pandora and that everything is the same as in 'Avatar.' "
That's got to be a joke, right? Well, it's hard to say. "Avatar" is becoming something more than a projected popcorn experience as it echoes through the world. Forget entertainment, this is now a topic of debate in religious, political, economic and cultural circles. James Cameron's jungle-moon epic has surpassed $2 billion in worldwide box-office receipts and after a victorious night at the Golden Globes (best motion picture, drama), the film about blue cat-people reaped nine Oscar nominations on Tuesday. How seriously is Hollywood taking the film? Well, consider the fact that nobody at the Globes banquet laughed out loud when Cameron gave part of his acceptance speech in the nutty language spoken by his (literally) tree-hugging aliens.

You thought the movie was big on the Imax screen? It's become far larger in the marketplace of ideas. Some people see the film as anti-American propaganda from lefty Tinseltown (on Big Hollywood, the movie was carpet-bombed: "Think of 'Avatar' as 'Death Wish 5' for leftists . . . a simplistic, revisionist revenge fantasy") but others view it as white-male fantasy that is in fact the essence of American oppression (Greta Hagen-Richardson fumes in the Daily Iowan that "Avatar" is insidious in its messaging: "Being part of the dominant ideology doesn't automatically give you super powers of intellect, strength and comprehension").

Intergalactic setting aside, some moviegoers watched the film and felt it hit too close to home; Essence magazine, for instance, polled its readers on whether they thought the green movie about blue people was in fact anti-black. The Vatican, just so you know, sees a different problem with the film: The fact that it puts Mother Nature ahead of the Heavenly Father. "Nature is no longer a creation to defend, but a divinity to worship," was the encoded message of the movie, according to a frosty review from Vatican Radio.

Some people thought it was demeaning to women, others thought it was demeaning to people who use wheelchairs. And, of course, where there's smoke, there's fire: The Smoke Free Movies campaign says that the screen time given to Sigourney Weaver's cigarette- loving botanist was the equivalent of $50 million in free advertising for the tobacco industry, but who can say if those numbers are puffed up? There were also reports that a 42-year-old Taiwanese man with a history of high-blood pressure and hypertension died after seeing "Avatar," possibly because of a stroke; because it was "Avatar," the report zoomed down the information superhighway and hit way too many journalistic potholes; OK magazine, for instance, went with the headline: "Man's excitement over 'Avatar' may have caused his death," which is true, just like it's true to report that gunshot victims collapse after loud noises.
The latest headline: The decision by the Chinese government to yank "Avatar" from theaters and replace it with a homegrown film, a movie either made for pure business reasons or maybe, just maybe, to prevent possible citizen incitement from all those weird off-world concepts about environmental responsibility. Cameron must be dazed and amused by all these new dimensions added to his 3-D epic. On Oscar night, if he wins the big trophy, let's hope he doesn't repeat his hubris from the "Titanic" triumph ("I'm the king of two worlds!") and instead looks out on all the competing opinions of "Avatar" and acknowledges them with seven words. "I see you . . . and I hear you."

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Pop Culture Final Exam Questions

Here are the final exam questions for Pop Culture for 2BA/2. Below is 2BA/3 which are nearly the same except for #3, 7 and 10

1. How does pop culture influence society?
2. Do you think popular culture objectifies women?
3. What role does social media play in pop culture?
4. What is essential to achieve success in the pop culture world? Is talent important?
5. Do you think popular culture has become over-sexualized?
6. How has popular culture changed over the years?
7. What is your definition of being cool? How has the definition changed?
8. Discuss a recent outrageous popular culture event?
9. Why are people drawn to controversy?
10. How does popular culture reinforce stereotypes?

2BA/3:

1. How does pop culture influence society?
2. Do you think popular culture objectifies women?
3. Should celebrities serve as role models? Do they have a responsibility?
4. What is essential to achieve success in the pop culture world? Is talent important?
5. Do you think popular culture has become over-sexualized?
6. How has popular culture changed over the years?
7. How may popular culture influence one's beliefs?
8. Discuss a recent outrageous popular culture event?
9. Why are people drawn to controversy?
10. Who is your favorite popular culture icon and why?

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Pop Culture Part 2 Repeat

Hey everyone. Due to dean's hours last Monday, many people from 2BA/2 were absent and 2BA/3 didn't have a class. Therefore, those who attended last week's 2BA/2 class are excused from attending the next class as I'll be repeating the same class as earlier this week. 2BA/3 and those who missed the 2BA/2 will be having a class based on the article I posted last week - http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2013/0827/Miley-Cyrus-twerking-and-the-sexual-hazing-of-American-pop-stars

If you're confused, please email me. See some of you on Monday. Oh, and if you're interested in the Pub Quiz, here's the Facebook link - https://www.facebook.com/events/372081529602790/

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Pop Culture Two

Here's your article for week 2 of pop culture featuring none other than Hanna Montana! The article is copy and pasted below or you can click over to it here - http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2013/0827/Miley-Cyrus-twerking-and-the-sexual-hazing-of-American-pop-stars

Update: Just got an email about Dean's hours on Monday. I'll try to figure out what's happening. In the meantime, you'll notice a couple of links to the right; one is my personal blog the other is to something called Rabbitfire where you can watch videos on the different speaking topics. 

Miley Cyrus, twerking, and the 'sexual hazing' of American pop stars

The vision of Miley Cyrus twerking on stage at the MTV Video Music Awards might have caused outrage, but such performances have become a rite of passage for young female artists.

By Staff writer / August 27, 2013
Robin Thicke (l.) and Miley Cyrus perform 'Blurred Lines' at the MTV Video Music Awards on Sunday at the Barclays Center in the Brooklyn borough of New York.
Charles Sykes/Invision/AP

New York

Miley Cyrus twerked her way into a cultural maelstrom Sunday, after her tongue-wagging sexual prancing at MTV’s Video Music Awards made her the talk of nearly everyone with an Internet connection.

Yet even as millions of viewers continue to watch and rewatch her VMA performance on YouTube – there have been more than 7 million hits since Sunday night – Ms. Cyrus may have uncovered more than her flesh-colored bikini costume, laying bare as much about contemporary culture as about the young artist herself.
It's a clash straight from the pages of Sigmund Freud: a deeply-rooted desire to gaze on sexual images – of women in particular – while at the same time cluck-clucking about the moral standards of the female performing. This moral ambivalence has become part of what some scholars call a well-rehearsed pop ritual: A female pop star comes of age by becoming an exaggerated sexual caricature, exploiting the moral controversy her performance generates for financial gain. In other words, sex always sells, in the end.

Cyrus’s performance was, in many ways, one of the most explicit and raunchy performances ever seen on MTV – and that is saying a great deal. Coming onstage first in a small, skin-tight leotard, Cyrus performed her summer hit “We Can’t Stop,” a song that celebrates “twerking,” the name for a hip-hop-inspired club dance in which a woman bounces her hips up and down to emphasize her derrière.

She was then joined by Robin Thicke, an R&B artist whose smash hit “Blurred Lines” has also generated controversy this summer, since its video includes nude models dancing around fully dressed men, who sing “I hate these blurred lines; I know you want it, but you’re a good girl.” Cyrus danced and twerked and used a foam “No. 1” finger prop to simulate a variety of lewd acts on Mr. Thicke.

Her performance has obviously tweaked a cultural nerve. The gape-inducing spectacle even made pop stars – no strangers to push-it-to-the-edge performances, to be sure – bulge their eyes and cover their mouths. And many of them joined groups like the Parents Television Council and other conservative leaders to condemn the former Disney superstar.

But Cyrus is certainly not the first pop singer to provoke controversy at the VMAs. In fact, the annual award show has become known as a kind of debutante’s ball marking the end of a female star’s age of innocence.

Madonna removed parts of her white wedding dress costume and writhed on the VMA stage singing “Like a Virgin” almost 30 years ago. Britney Spears invoked Madonna in her 2001 performance of “I’m a Slave 4 U,” dancing suggestively with a live albino Burmese python – and leaving her schoolgirl outfits behind.

And both performers shocked VMA audiences in another allusion to Madonna’s 1984 performance, when the Material Girl herself dressed as a top-hatted groom and “married” Ms. Spears and Christina Aguilera at the 2003 show – the lasting image being an iconic and explicit kiss between Madonna and Spears.

“On one hand, it is a rite of passage for young women in the popular entertainment industry,” says Gordon Coonfield, professor of media studies at Villanova University in Philadelphia and an expert on pop culture. “Some big event gets co-opted by a salacious performance that pushes the bounds of propriety. This is followed by a reaction phase in which images and talk of the event go viral. More buzz is generated by a completely predictable backlash of moral outrage.”

But the ritual comes at a cost to society's view of femininity, Professor Coonfield says. “Cyrus comes of age under the public eye. And the only kind of womanhood that public seems to permit these young people is that of a grotesquely exaggerated femininity, one that is hyper-sexualized and one that demands and relishes their humiliation.”

It’s the kind of blurred lines that pop songs have long celebrated – think of Billy Joel’s 1977 hit “Only the Good Die Young,” in which the singer tries to coax a “good” Catholic girl to give up her virtue. But once she does, she becomes an object of scorn.

“Our cultural ambivalence towards women shows up every day in the form of the sexual double standard,” says Kathleen Bogle, professor of sociology at La Salle University in Philadelphia. “But periodically our cultural angst goes public when we react to Madonna, Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus or whoever the flavor of the month is at that time. What all these women have in common is finding a formula that simultaneously outrages the public while filling their personal bank accounts.”

So the double standard is caught up in an economic matrix that bestows riches and fame on those pop stars who can cleverly play on these cultural ambivalences, creating another layer, often unseen, to the moral outrage on display now toward Cyrus.

“Miley Cyrus is exploited because she’s a young woman who’s only valued sexually, but at the same time she’s representative of an exploiting group, because she’s a white person who’s essentially using African-American cultural output to amplify her own money and power. And Madonna was similar in some ways,” says Aram Sinnreich, professor of media studies at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J., and an expert on the intersection of music and social networking.

“But that’s part of what makes her so compelling and so interesting,” Professor Sinnreich adds. “You don’t know whether she’s the exploiter or the exploited.... She's straddling all those dichotomous positions at once, which maximizes the tension, which ultimately maximizes the marketing value."

Yet Cyrus went beyond the typical Madonna-Britney-Christina template for the coming-out pop ritual for young female artists. And this may also explain some of the vehemence of those now condemning her. With her cropped hair and her appropriation of twerking – commonly seen as an underground club dance by black women – Cyrus touched even more cultural ambivalences.

“Rather than donning the typical tropes of sexy femaleness – blond hair, tight dress – Miley was almost grotesque, with her teddy-bear leotard and ever-present tongue,” says Alice Marwick, professor of communications and media studies at Fordham University in New York. “While she was dressed skimpily and groped her co-star Robin Thicke and her backup dancers, this type of aggressive sexuality doesn't fit the mold.”

“In both her VMAs performance and the 'We Can't Stop' video, Miley appropriates urban black culture ... to try to distance herself from her former Disney roots – but also her roots in red-state country music,” says Professor Marwick.

In the end, however, this pop ritual is reserved for young women.

“Justin Timberlake didn't have to endure this kind of sexual hazing to become a serious adult male artist,” says Coonfield at Villanova. “And can you imagine Justin Bieber engaging in a humiliating, hyper-sexualized display like this in order to transition from boy pop to artist?”

“It is convenient to blame the tabloid press,” he says. “But ... we participate by taking pleasure in this ritual. So while it may be tempting to blame Cyrus, or her handlers, or MTV, this really goes much deeper.”

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Popular Culture

Hey guys. Here's the link to this year's first article, it's a little bit difficult but not that long - http://www.slate.com/articles/life/cool_story/2013/09/the_history_and_future_of_cool_what_does_the_term_mean_in_2013.html

Another good read, from a completely different perspective (not obligatory) is here - www.salon.com/2011/09/29/how_niches_killed_culture/

Plus, I forgot to mention that I've also got a personal blog you can click over to anytime you're bored and are curious what's really happening in the world - http://theendisalwaysnear.blogspot.com

Cool Story

What does "cool" even mean in 2013?

Gwendolyn Brooklyn, Cary Grant, Miles Davis, Justin Timberlake
From left, Gwendolyn Brooks, Cary Grant, Miles Davis, and Justin Timberlake. Cool has come a long way.
Left three photos courtesy of Wikimedia Commons. Right photo byMerrick Morton/Columbia TriStar Marketing Group, Inc.
Part 1 of a monthlong series on the history and future of cool.

Last month the electro-psychedelic band MGMT released a video for its “Cool Song No. 2.” It features Michael K. Williams of The Wire as a killer-dealer-lover-healer figure stalking a landscape of vegetation, narcotics labs, rituals, and Caucasians. “What you find shocking, they find amusing,” the singer drones in Syd Barrett-via-Spiritualized mode. The video is loaded with signposts of cool, first among them Williams, who played maybe the coolest TV character of the past decade as the gay Baltimore-drug-world stickup man Omar Little. But would you consider “Cool Song No. 2” genuinely cool, or is it trying too hard? (Is that why it’s called “No. 2”?)

The very question is cruel, of course, and competitive. You can praise the Brooklyn band’s surreal imagination, or you can call it a dull, derivative outfit renting out another artist’s aura to camouflage that it has none of its own. It depends which answer you think makes you cooler.

If that sounds cynical, cynicism is difficult to avoid when the subject of cool arises now. Self-conscious indie rockers are easy targets, vulnerable to charges of recycling half-century-old postures that arguably were purloined from African-American culture in the first place. But what is cool in 2013, and why are we still using this term for what scholar Peter Stearns pegged as “a twentieth-century emotional style”? Often credited to sax player Lester Young in the 1940s, the coinage was in general circulation by the mid-1950s, with Miles Davis’s Birth of the Cool and West Side Story’s finger-snapping gang credo “Cool.” You’d be unlikely to use other decades-old slang—groovy or rad or fly—to endorse any current cultural object, at least with a straight face, but somehow cool remains evergreen.

The standard bearers, however, have changed. Once the rebellious stuff of artists, bohemians, outlaws, and (some) movie stars, coolness is now as likely to be attributed to the latest smartphone or app or the lucre they produce: The iconic statement on the matter has to be Justin Timberlake as Sean Parker saying to Jesse Eisenberg as Mark Zuckerberg in The Social Network, “A million dollars isn’t cool. You know what’s cool? A billion dollars.” That is, provided you earn it before you’re 30—the tech age has also brought on an extreme-youth cult, epitomized by fashion blogger and Rookie magazine editor Tavi Gevinson, who is a tad less cool now at 17 than she was when she emerged at age 11. What would William S. Burroughs have had to say about that? (Maybe “Just Do It!”)
 
Cool has come a long way, literally. In a 1973 essay called “An Aesthetic of the Cool,” art historian Robert Farris Thompson traced the concept to the West African Yoruba idea of itutu—a quality of character denoting composure in the face of danger, as well as playfulness, humor, generosity, and conciliation. It was carried to America with slavery and became a code through which to conceal rage and cope with brutality with dignity; it went on to inform the emotional textures of blues, jazz, the Harlem Renaissance, and more, then percolated into the mainstream.
Stearns argues that cool’s imperatives of flexibility and fluidity helped Americans escape rigid Victorian morality into modernity and developed along with mass production and mass media as a new individualist ethos. But most analysts agree it only became widespread after World War II. As Dick Pountain and David Robins wrote in their 2000 book Cool Rules, it “took the collapse of faith in organized religion and the trauma of two world wars to turn it into a mass phenomenon,” one that thrummed with the paranoias of the atomic age and the Cold War as well as fantasies of cross-racial convergence. (See Norman Mailer’s mostly regrettable essay on the “White Negro.”)

Elvis and James Dean introduced cool to Middle America, but it was the Beat movement that revered it most, putting its queer shoulder to the wheel, even as black poet Gwendolyn Brooks was warning that “We Real Cool” was coming to mean “we die soon.” The Beats were succeeded by both the Warhol Factory and ’60s hippie culture, which converted cool to common currency in concert with Madison Avenue. And not just in its crucible, but around the world via pop and consumer culture. As Pountain and Robins claim, “American Cool proved in the end to be more exportable than Soviet Communism.”

That oversimplified history gives some sense of how cool moved from margins to center and became our elastic container for anyone and anything with relevance and spark. To be cool is to have cultural and social capital, and most urgently it is to be not uncool—a hang-up most of us pick up in adolescence that’s damnably hard to shake even if it mellows with age. Cool is an attitude that allows detached assessment, but one that prizes an air of knowingness over specific knowledge. I think that’s why it doesn’t become dated, unlike hotter-running expressions of enthusiasm like groovy or rad. As Stearns says, cool is “an emotional mantle, sheltering the whole personality from embarrassing excess. … Using the word is part of the process of conveying the right impression.”

This is part of what makes it so easy to appropriate, to market, and even to manufacture, in a process that’s grown ever more rapid—nothing wants to be cooler today than a corporation, and digital media erase the need to wait for lifestyle and aesthetic innovations to make their way from the outré to the mainstream. As critic John Leland has put it, “In a society run on information, hip is all there is.”

That’s the trouble with trying to point to cool’s center today. It is everywhere and nowhere. It is noise-music cassettes and K-pop, adult male My Little Pony fans and Maker Faires, alternative comedy podcasts and Holy Hip Hop, the feminist Twittersphere and even creepy pickup artistry, depending who you are, and most of all it is being coolly aware of all of the above. Mind you, most claims about a new balkanization of taste are nearsighted: Contrary to sentimental legend there never was a pop “monoculture.” So the issue now is not so much cool’s fracturing as its evanescence: Cool is what’s on BuzzFeed or Reddit in the morning, but it’s not cool by end of the day. The more ephemeral, the cooler; Snapchat is cooler than Instagram, which is cooler than Twitter, which is cooler than Facebook, which is cooler than the Web, which is infinitely cooler than print.

As a result, today’s celebrities, by definition overexposed, seldom can hold on to any 20th-century-like appearance of cool. Kanye West’s endurance as a superstar is owing to the fact that cool was never exactly what he brought to the table—he has more in common with the revenge-of-the-nerds, hip-to-be-square tide that’s elevated the tech geeks. Beyoncé is an old-fashioned showbiz gal under the surface, while her 1990s-holdover husband vacillates unattractively between flirting with avant-garde artists and flaunting ever-more-venal materialism. Anonymity and disappearing acts (cf., Daft Punk or Earl Sweatshirt) can be effective gambits to extend a bit of mystique past fruit-fly timelines.

Jennifer Lawrence arguably has attained “it girl” status partly through displays of uncoolness (the Oscar-steps stumble, the zany motormouth, the gormlessness when encountering her acting heroes) that only set her actual suaveness as an actress in a more flattering light. In another register, Lady Gaga and now Miley Cyrus push themselves beyond fashionable eccentricity into the deliberately grotesque. Lena Dunham shoots herself in awkward nudity on Girls in part to knock herself off any possible pedestal. This pattern prevails even among fictional characters—the anti-heroes in 21st-century serial “quality” drama aren’t chill Eastwood or Brando types but panic-attack-prone Tony Soprano, or Walter White, whose scheming intellect is undone by his pedantic-nebbish emotional insecurity. The likes of Omar are the exceptions that prove the (white) rule.

High-profile uncoolness comes as a relief to today’s audiences, I believe, because the stakes of cool for so many of us have become disastrously high. “Knowledge work,” the main alternative to subsistence-level service jobs, demands a performance of knowingness, and the transitory instability of employment requires everyone to operate as free agents marketing our own “personal brands.” In this situation—the deregulation of everything (except pot, so it remains universally hip) and the disorganization of the labor market—coolness becomes all but mandatory, even as we break into a sweat.

For a wired generation, cool’s markers aren’t tough to acquire, but maintaining them can become a frantic preoccupation. Young aspirants in cultural fields often come off to me as fairly confident that they are cool and profoundly unsettled about whether they’ll get to be anything more. The much-maligned hipsters (a cultural bogeyman I’ve avoided mentioning till now) expand that syndrome to a parodic, near-pornographic level—their apparent overidentification with the laws of cultural capital and embodying rootless mobility exposes, consciously or unconsciously, the unspoken edicts of post-industrial cool apathy, as if to say, “All the emperor has are clothes.”

Is coolness a trap, then, a nightmare from which we need to awake? Compared to the scale of the world’s real problems, it’s a frivolous, even malignant distraction, a cul-de-sac of endless and servile adolescence. Yet once it shielded African-American culture and pried open space for Jewish, gay, and other repressed perspectives. How then does it shift when the president of the United States, a conspicuously cool customer, is black and advocates gay marriage, and when black artists (rather than white imitators, though those still abound) tend to dominate the pop charts? The post-racial society is a myth, but perhaps it is a myth of cool—the one that spurs, for instance, MGMT to cast Williams as a shaman-assassin, or Vice magazine to dabble in hipster racism, or kids at electronic music festivals to dress up in faux Native American headdresses and face paint as clueless “tribal chic” even in front of a real live Native American music group that condemns it as “redface.”

So, just as the camp aesthetic inevitably has been diluted by queer mainstreaming, maybe cool is finished as a distinct category and is now just a generic hook on which to hang hierarchy. And yet … I owe cool too much (e.g., Krazy Kat, Gertrude Stein, Thelonious Monk, Frank O’Hara, Agnes Varda, The Slits, Outkast, David Foster Wallace [despite his protests], etc., etc.) to give up willingly on its legacy of canny, impassioned skepticism and its capacity to slip the strictures of propriety and social segregation. It’s not like we’ve run out of boundaries that want crossing: What about, say, the ones that drew the rules of cool with minimal input from women, non-city dwellers, or non-Westerners? Perhaps some elegant sidestep remains around the present sensation of being hornswoggled into a symbolic-status Hunger Games in which the scramble for cred is a top-down bloodbath of “creative destruction.”
Yeah, man, that’d be coolsville.

Thursday, October 3, 2013

New School Year

Hey there guys and gals. This here is your class blog where you'll find articles for both 2BA/2 and 2BA/3 to be read for the upcoming class each week. Whenever there is a different article for the classes, as will happen for example when there are presentations, the weekly post's title will make it clear which class is to read which article. In addition to being a convenient way to get everyone the article, the comment section may be used as a kind of forum where you can ask me questions or share ideas among yourselves; it is a perfect place to work on final exam questions for each topic. Anyway, the article for our first topic, pop culture, should be up soon so be sure to read it and prepare yourself for the upcoming class!