Subrubia

Here is the opening theme to Weeds, a television show that I imagine most of you have at least heard about. I think it is a very good example of what Kunstler discusses in his book.

Julia Child

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Julia Child, whom Michael Pollan references in the article that you read for class, here is a video of the "potato pancake incident," both by Julia herself and by Meryl Streep as Julia Child in the film Julie and Julia.

The Geography of Nowhere by James Howard Kunstler

James Howard brings up interesting points throughout these readings, though nothing that I feel like I haven't heard before. I agree with most of his statements, that the highways lined with huge shopping malls, fast-food restaurants, and covered with cars seem to be a step for America in the wrong direction. Besides American towns losing their personal identity and anything that makes them unique from the millions of other towns, this development kills the environment. As Howard says, the mega malls and giant complexes are built over once lush cornfields or land. THis destruction of the natural environment, I think, leads to a disconnect between people and the world they live in. I think that no relation to nature will lead to a less intelligent, observant, and generally less happy population.

Maggie

Michael Pollan

I have not yet received a blog post, but I want to open this so that you can respond. Please just post your comment as normal below.

WALL-E

Besides Wall-E just being a Pixar masterpiece, the Disney film calls into question some very interesting societal issues. Wall-E highlights the irony of social networking and its ability to “connect” people. Also, The film comments on the nature of our societies’ growing demand for consumption and instant gratification. The “Big and Large” store that is involved in every aspect of life on Earth and in space (as characterized by the advertisement on the moon) is an example of this. However the most prominent issue addressed in Wall-E is that of environmental destruction. The film depicts a future that is the result of years of environmental degradation and thoughtless consumerism.
The most powerful element of film used in the movie was the setting and place. The setting for the first 30 minutes of the movie was a dark and colorless trash ridden city on a silent Earth. Wall-Es interactions are initially only with his environment. The trash is his life: his enemy, and his only friend through his passion for trinkets and old films. The Earth at that point in history is a barren landscape without life. However it is ironic that the only life left, being the humans aboard the Axiom, exists in the hostile and lifeless environment of space. However the human environment aboard the Axiom is more like a virtual resort or rather a survival arc. The environments in which the humans live blind them to the truth of their existence. Both settings of the movie, the destroyed earth and the spaceship, share some commonalities. For example, the earth is lifeless at this point in time, similarly the humans aboard the ship become more and more “lifeless” due to their inability to think independently or relate to others. By this point the robots, designed and programmed by humans, are able to function more independently than their creators.

Jon Arthur

Corrigan and Film Analysis

Because 2001: A Space Odyssey has little dialogue during the
introductory scenes, the camera angles and filming techniques are of
utmost importance. The opening of the movie is a simple black scene
followed by an image of the earth from outer space. The purpose of the
blackness is to create suspense and make the first actual image that
appears be all the more dramatic. The scene following that of earth
consists of various shots of the animals and apes that inhabited the
barren planet some time ago. These shots are mostly wide frame shots
with the focus on the group of animals rather than any one individual.
In the background of many of the shots is an expansive landscape that
allows views to see the vast emptiness before humans inhabited the
earth. As the story progresses a large black monolith appears and the
apes surround it. The shot is taken from the bottom of the monolith;
the angle roughly where the apes are standing. As one ape discovers
how to use a bone as a tool, the camera begins to focus on this
leader. Because of the strong focus on this individual ape, the
filming emphasizes his dominance and importance. As the other apes
catch on, the camera shifts back to a wide shot showing their
inclusion with the lead ape. The camera shifts back and forth between
both ape factions to show each reaction. The scene ends with iconic
shot of a bone flung into the air that transforms into a space craft.

Alex Belak

2001: A Space Odyssey and Neil Postman

To be honest, it took me quite a while to appreciate the film 2001: A Space Odyssey for how great of a movie it truly is. The first 5 minutes of black screen were not the best first impression of a movie I have watched. However, once the movie progressed, I started to understand how the ambiguities in Kubrick film were actually filled with meaning. Essentially, I became aware that the lack of dialogue was really not such at all, but instead merely a different style of dialogue, namely: image and sound. That black screen I was so turned off from at first was actually a viewing of what there was pre-world; pre-creation. Rather, that is what I took it as, for I feel most of the film was meant to be self-interpreting.
From here, the plot was essentially broken into three revolutionary states. We begin with the apes and their development of tools. Then the plot jumps to humans exploring the stars. HAL, the 9000 computer traveling with the men, was essentially an evolved creation from the tool we saw the apes first develop. HAL was so advanced that humans literally lost control of him and Dave had to shut him down. This part of the film was essential for two main reasons. First, I thought it was very telling and scary of where we are headed. We've taken the idea of using a tool to facilitate an action and created a world interconnected by technology. How far off could Kubrick be that this web of computers could not create problem in the future? Hasn't it already with personal privacy and safety? Second, the disconnection of HAL represented the evolution beyond tools. Here, the images and plot of the movie became even more ambiguous and interpretable in multiple ways. To me, the world beyond tools consisted of new abilities in regards to time and aging. Dave found himself in a new world, at a new age and apparently existentially watching himself at an even older age.
This idea of humans being unrestricted by time reminded me of a concept I've heard of called String Theory. It is very complex and I certainly don't under it completely, but from what I understand it basically deals with the idea of dimensions and identifies new ones we don't think of commonly. Immediately, this seems related to Kubrick's idea of a dimension beyond time and age. Overall, despite my initial reaction to the movie, I really enjoyed it and it certainly provoked the idea in me that there is more creation and evolution to come in the world and beyond the world.

Deep Ecology

Shelley

The idea of deep ecology is very interesting to me. It seems to be something that is becoming more and more prevalent in todays’ society. I find it a rather difficult subject to think about. Deep ecology is defined as “a sense of personal responsibility, not simply to persons living now but also to future human generations.” This is quite a large responsibility. Shallow ecology on the other hand, is not caring about the future and treating the environment however you want. It’s our land, and we can do what we want with it. I am quite impressed with our community’s new found “environmental awareness,” because personally, I find it rather easy to fall into the “I don’t care what happens after I die” mentality. This may be a little harsh, but if you think about the selfish world we live in, I don’t think it’s too far off.
You can argue both sides of this ecological debate, but when it comes down to whether we should preserve the environment, I think the obvious answer is yes. In Chapter 1 of Weisman’s text, “A Lingering Scent of Eden” I got a nice reminder as to why this preservation is beneficial, maybe not to us, but to our children and theirs. The only reason we are able to witness the “half-million acres of the Bialowieza Puszcza” and the one hundred and fifty foot high oak, and really, the last remains of wilderness in Europe, is because the generations before us were kind enough not to completely destroy the earth they inhabited. Weisman really highlights the beauty of the world we live in. He discusses the natural glory of nature and personally, after reading these chapters, I feel more obligated to do my part in preserving the environment in order to ensure that the generations after us get the chance to observe the same natural wonders that we were lucky enough to witness.