Glass Castle presentation outline

• Introduction
• Poverty-stricken Americans are marginalised
• Tension within poor American communities
• Poverty and the 'American Dream'
• Discussion of whether people 'choose' to live in poverty, including the question: Do you think The Glass Castle represents the view that poverty is something that can only be escaped through hard work and individual drive, not by welfare and government aid? And do you agree with this view?
• Poverty and pride
• Shame of poverty-stricken background
• Social problems and negative stereotypes - alcholism
• Social problems - abuse
• Discussion of the question: Do you think that Jeannette Walls portrays a negative stereotype of poor people?
• Conclusion

American Studies Week 9 Blog: Glass Castle

American Studies Week 9 Blog: Glass Castle

Find and analyze an online review of The Glass Castle.

Source:http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/13/books/review/013COVERPROSE.html?_r=0

Francine Prose’s review of The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls, although published in the prestigious New York Times, unfortunately consists of little more than an introduction to the book and so fails to offer any real critical insight into its nature or quality. But given that the review was written in 2005, just after the work was published, this perhaps is not much of a surprise, as it is clear that Prose’s most important purpose was to encourage readers to buy it. A brief summary of the review will provide evidence to support this judgment and then to allow for a critique of it using the benefit of hindsight.

Prose’s review can be broken down into two main components: 1) Praise for Jeannette Walls, and 2) A sustained attempt at highlighting the inability of Walls’s parents to take care of their children. Beginning her review by claiming that memoirs are our “modern fairy tales”, Prose immediately begins to praise Walls, asserting that the title of her novel is fitting, given that it evokes “the architecture of fantasy and magic”. She continues in this vein by stating that it is admirable that Walls refused “to indulge in amateur psychoanalysis” of her parents, and that her work is even comparable to Harry Crews’ memoir, “A Childhood”. However, she saves her greatest praise for last, claiming that Walls has “succeeded in doing what most writers set out to do – to write the kind of book they themselves most want to read”, and that despite it falling “short of being art, it is nonetheless “a very good memoir”. 

In her attempt to depict the inability of Walls’s parents to come to terms with the demands of raising their children, Prose begins by providing a brief characterisation of both Jeannette’s parents, Rex Walls and Rose Mary Walls, before noting multiple examples of their attitude of neglect recounted in the memoir. However, it is perhaps her statement that “The Glass Castle” which gives the work its title is but a “carefree façade with which two people who were unsuited to raise children camouflaged their struggle to survive in a world for which they were likewise ill equipped,” that best encapsulates her message. Interestingly, though, Prose also praises the parents for home-schooling their children and is critical of the education system, stating that “it suggests something about our education system” that the children turned out to “academically ahead of local kids” on the occasions in which they did attend schools.

            The chief problem with Prose’s review is that its focus is too narrow, meaning that she does not pick up on the issues of poverty, alcoholism and mental health that play a huge role in shaping the childhood experiences of Walls. Thus, whilst highlighting the horrific experiences of Walls’ childhood, she fails to alert the reader to the obvious correlation between social issues and dysfunctional families. In fact, what she appears to do is to portray the Walls family as a unique and isolated case of a dysfunctional family, whose problems were entirely the result of the individual deficiencies of her parents that made them unsuitable to be parents. This leads to her inadvertently diverting the attention of potential readers to what Walls truly wanted to highlight, as well as suggesting that dysfunctional families were not common in that period. However, this was not the case, as Walls clearly depicts the poor conditions of the areas in which her family resided, and of the  several dysfunctional families who suffered from similar problems to her family by living in such conditions. In Prose’s defence, however, it should be noted that she does manage to comment on issues such as rape and the vulnerability of children, but again she only touches on them briefly, although it should be noted that they also do not receive extended treatment by Walls.

            To conclude, it can be said that Prose’s review is a good starting point if one wants to encourage someone to devote time to reading this memoir. As a book review, though, it should be said that it is not of the highest quality, with it only partially discussing the issues central to the novel. However, what is perhaps most serious is that despite appearing to offer a synopsis of the book, Prose fails to mention two of its main characters, Walls’s younger brother and sister, who played a huge role in the author’s early life. Omitting their side of the story, which is very affecting, means that readers of the review are not aware of some of the most powerful material contained in this memoir.

'Kids React to Gay Marriage'

I chose to look at a video entitled ‘Kids React to Gay Marriage’ made by TheFineBros, Benny and Rafi Fine, two brothers who are online producers, writers, and directors who are known for their successful ‘React’ videos and have been creating content online since 2004.

In said episode TheFineBros interviews thirteen children between the ages of five and thirteen from California who discuss the sensitive subject of same-sex marriage within the United States. The video notes, “The opinions of children about these issues can give incredibly valuable insight into where our society currently stands and where we are headed as people. It's important to discuss these topics openly in hopes of a better tomorrow through dialogue and conversation." The video begins with the kids watching two different viral videos of same-sex marriage proposals and then a Q&A about their opinions about marriage equality.

Most of the children’s reactions to the videos and the concept of gay marriage are positive and hopeful, which suggests that with this view towards rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans, there’s the possibility that the issues involved could be dissolved for the next generation. Although the video does not give an explicit stance on the issue of gay or lesbian identity in the United States, I think one can assume that the video is pro-LGBT.

Therefore, I think the video depicts that issues with gay and lesbian identity are definitely not what they once were as the video promotes the view that we should be accepting of the LGBT community and support equal rights for everyone. As one child states, “If one person should be able to do something then everybody else should be able to do it."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TJxnYgP6D8 

Gay TV On The Go - American Studies Blog: Sexual Identity

American Studies Blog: Sexual Identity

From Youtube (embed please), post and analyse any video which promotes gay or lesbian identity in the contemporary USA.  What issues of identity appear paramount today?

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTqCueFaumo

            Gay TV On The Go is a national web-based TV network geared towards the LGBTQ community. It aims to provide its viewers with insights into the real lives, real issues, and real communities of LGBTQ individuals across the country. In addition to its national stations, it also has several regional stations that cater to the need of different LGBTQ communities, by focusing on local issues within each region. This particular video was broadcast by the national station on the 12^th of November 2013, and highlights several contemporary issues concerning LGBTQ individuals in general within the United States today. 

            There are several points that are highlighted by  the video. One is that current issues regarding LGBTQ identity differ clearly from those that were central to the gay rights movement of the 1970-80s. For example, the key aim for a member of the LGBTQ community of the 1970s, as described in Carl Wittman’s “Gay Manifesto”, was an individualized one; to be accepted by openly declaring one’s sexual identity. Current issues, by contrast, focus on the concept of equality and address topics such as same-sex marriage and discrimination. To illustrate this point briefly, the video reports on the imminent passing of the SB10 bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the states of Illinois and Hawaii, whilst also noting the passage of a bill in the Senate to end discrimination within the job sector. This reasons for this shift of focus on issues regarding LGBTQ identity become a little clearer when one examines Livingston’s article more closely and find that we can infer that gays/LGBTQ no longer have to campaign for the acceptance of their identity, and that they have attained a certain degree of freedom and choice. Livingston is therefore able to claim that they no longer feel the need to ally themselves with a gay/ LGBTQ culture, and that current issues are not the common concern of all gay/ LGBTQ communities, but rather reflect the beliefs of certain individuals or communities within the broader LGBTQ movement.

            Another observation that can be made after viewing the video is that just as in the 1970-80s, politics, or if to be more specific, Republicans, still play a huge role in preventing LGBTQ individuals from attaining equal rights. Just as Reagan tried and often succeeded in preventing gays from being accepted as healthy, legal citizens, by depicting them as mentally ill patients, we can still see today that Republicans, under the banner of “traditional values”, attempt to sabotage any moves made by the LGBTQ community to establish equal grounding with “normal citizens.” This is made explicitly clear in the reference to an article from the Washington Times which reports Republicans as declaring that “the discrimination bill is going nowhere”, suggesting that despite the Senate passing it, they will continue to prevent the bill from reaching the floor of the House. In light of this, it could be said that without radical changes in the political sphere, LGBTQ individuals will continue to suffer in terms ofissues such as those raised within the video.

A criticism that could be levelled at the video is that whilst highlighting certain issues pertaining to LGBTQ communities, it offers no arguments or concrete evidence to its viewers as to why they should be entitled to rights such same-sex marriage or freedom from discrimination in the job sector. This is in stark contrast to the feminists we studied last week, who appeared to be more vocal and assertive in their attempts to prove why the discrimination and stigmatization of women were unfounded. Surely, if the purpose of the network is to inform its viewers about the issues facing LGBTQ communities, it would be in their best interests to expand upon concepts such as civil and constitutional rights in order to garner their support. This failure could be attributed simply to the way the network operates, in that it may purely want to pursue a format similar to that of a news broadcast, but nonetheless it does raise the question of whether the network truly considers the issues it mentions as paramount/important in furthering LGBTQ identity within America.

To conclude, we can say that in recent years there are several issues that have come to be considered of importance to gay identity. However, there is also evidence to suggest that such issues are not seen in the same light across the entire LGBTQ community, with some giving more consideration to certain areas than others. This, as noted above, can be attributed to some individuals feeling relatively content with how they are currently treated by society. In addition, we can also say that without some form of political reform LGBTQ communities will almost certainly continue to suffer in a manner similar to how they do today. Finally, it is interesting to note that the network appears to adopt a generally positive attitude towards recent developments regarding issues of central concern. This suggests that it wants to encourage its viewers to be optimistic, and to send out the message that despite full equality not having been achieved yet, steps are definitely being taken to ensure that this will happen at some point in the future.

Other Source: http://www.gaytvonthego.com/gaytvonthego/

GLAAD President: Gay Identity Involves "Inviting People to Understand"

GLAAD stands for Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, and is a US non-government organisation founded in 1985 which helps to promote the image of LGBT people in the media. They have stated their mission as to give voice to the LGBT community, with the empowering use of real stories and holding the media accountable for the words and images they present, and helping grass-roots organisations communicate effectively. Their motto is "To promote understanding, increase acceptance, and advance equality."



The president of GLAAD 2011, Jarrett Barrios, talks in this video about his own life, about his sexuality as well as his ethnic background. He identifies himself as a Cuban-American, and talks at great length about the struggles he found when coming out to his family and being accepted as a minority-minority, someone who is not just a member of a minority ethnic group but also being gay. He talks about his work ethic, and acknowledges that you have to word extremely hard for equality, not just for the LGBT community, but for everyone in every aspect of society. He explicitly says that "you can't take justice for granted, but you have to work for it." This is shown in his life as he was the first member of his high school to get into Harvard.



The main issue with sexual identity which appeared in this video is how hard it is to not only be ethnic, but to also be gay. Barrios talks about how ethnicity is easy to spot, by last names and having an accent, or even looking a certain way. He says that sexuality is much more different, as it isn't shown in your last name or accent, and can only be identified by telling people. He recognises that yes, people can be discriminated against because they can be perceived to be gay, but that this is not the point. He says that it is different because you have to announce your inequality, and that the crux of the argument is that you have to "invite people to understand". This is paramount, as because sexuality isn't obvious, you need to be able to say it, and identify yourself as not a member of the majority before others can see your inequality. The main issue is the ability to freely be able to say what your sexuality is without the fear of prejudice and discrimination, and that it is not easy to be associated as gay as ethnicity is, because sexuality is inside of you often with no recognisable visual  traits.

________



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLAAD

http://www.glaad.org/

"Gay Men Will Marry Your Girlfriends" Gay Marriage campaign video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-YCdcnf_P8

When looking for a video promoting gay or lesbian identity in the USA, it was difficult to find one that expressed a clear idea of identity as well as the issues the community faces. At first the video Gay Men will Marry Your Girlfriends didn’t seem like an appropriate source to analyse, but when looking at it further, it is an openly pro-gay marriage campaign video that uses humour to get this message across.

The video satirically threatens straight men that if they do not approve of same sex marriages then gay men will get revenge by stealing their girlfriends from them. This is based on an old idea that gay men have far more in common with women and would make better partners than straight men, consigning to the stereotype that was introduced by the TV show Will & Grace. Although it is light-hearted and shows hugely clichéd representations of not just gay men, but heterosexual relationships, the issue raised of same-sex marriage resonates throughout the video. Compared to more serious campaigns, this video is a more memorable and more popular source. Just looking at the YouTube page it is on, shows over 8 million views, with a largely positive reception on the comments and approval section. This I find surprising to come out of a country where the issue is fiercely debated; yet because the video plays to the sitcom style stereotype that we have become used to, we can laugh along with it and spread it over social media, therefore spreading awareness.

It is clear that this is the major issue that the gay community are fighting for today and this is something that is important to their identity. However the video unfortunately goes against another issue of identity that is apparent in modern America, of consigning to a stereotype. The video has aggravated gay men as portraying them as this way and also women too. For a start there is no mention of lesbian marriage, only gay men are included in this campaign. To create this light-hearted humour, they have actually given into using fairly masculine and sexist portrayals of women, pandering to the straight male market and not the female market. If this were a video of straight men talking about how their girlfriends always want to go to the theatre and talk about their ‘problems’, then it would be slated as anti-feminist. It is difficult to find a modern American video that objectifies women more than this, making them out to be gullible and easy to get into bed. It never occurred to them that women might want to “marry – or don’t marry — whomever the fuck we want?” (feminspire). When you consider that the feminist movement was one of the most important allies to the gay rights movement in the 60s and 70s, this video is quite a hypocritical remark on their own struggle.

Sources

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nico-lang/gay-male-misogyny-goes-vi_b_2481769.html

http://feminspire.com/women-will-marry-whomever-we-want-a-response-to-gay-men-will-marry-your-girlfriends/

Lesbian identity in contemporary America

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/BMYwKVQZTTo?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/BMYwKVQZTTo?version=3&amp;hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

The video I chose to look at was made by Moushumi Ghose, a therapist, and Jenoa Harlow, who is a lesbian actress and activist. In their video they give advice for woman who have identified themselves as lesbians, but then find a man that they are attracted to. Their appearance and way of speaking is very modern and they do not fit the stereotype of what lesbians look like, as they are both feminine and have long hair. This suggests that contemporary lesbian identity has moved on in America, allowing women the choice to be gay and not feel as though they have to conform to the stereotype appearance.

Jenoa talks about "earning the gay" by coming out to friends and family, which shows that although more accepted now than at the beginning of the gay rights struggle, it is still a difficult identity to own. In fact, it is an identity that has to be earned, which has connotations of struggle and having to fight for the identity one has chosen. It also ties in with "gay pride", which encourages homosexuals to feel proud of their sexual identity, rather than ashamed.

Mou then goes on to say that perhaps this is a slightly outdated view of sexuality, that the 'proud' identity is perhaps too rigid. She supports a more fluid idea of sexuality. Similarly to feminism, it needed the almost dogmatic nature of the first and second waves to achieve equality, before it could settle down into something that embraces the plurality of modern Americans. It looks as though the same thing is happening with the gay rights movement; evidence that things are more equal for lesbians now than they ever have been. They no longer have to fight for their right to exist, they can now examine what their identity means. It has become about embracing the right to choose one's identity. This echoes writer Pual Livingston's reaction to Wittman's 'Gay Manifesto', in which Livingston wrote that the gay struggle for liberation has changed into a "struggle over the right way to be gay".

Mou and Jenoa accept that rights aren't completely equal in contemporary America, and that is why if a lesbian decides that she likes a man, she will most likely face backlash from the lesbian community because they will feel as if she is  turning her back on the struggle. However, they are also optimistic for the future and believe that in time full equality will have been achieved, and labeling sexuality won't matter as much anymore. They say that the future for equality is in the hands of the new generation, who are already growing up with a more fluid idea of sexuality than that of older generations. This is evidence that there is not a gay/straight divide, that people are more complicated than that. Although the divide can be useful in gaining rights, it cannot be maintained as it does not realistically reflect the way that people are.