Friday, November 16, 2012

May the Odds Be Ever in Your Favor

Well...besides the horrible critical reading flashbacks, I really liked the mimesis reading that went along with The Hunger Games this week. The first time I read the series, I never saw it that way: as a commentary on our society and it's pitfalls. But reading the first novel again, and then reading that article, I can see it clearly now.

Our society has always been an entertainment society. Right from the beginning, with minstrel shows and wild west shows, up through today where reality TV is the norm. We as human beings are always seeking out a form of entertainment--something that we can use to escape from our own existence and instead immerse ourselves into the lives of someone else. I won't lie--I do this too, especially with shows like Castle. But I feel like there's a big difference between immersing myself in the lives of fictional characters and immersing myself into the lives of real people. Living, breathing human beings whose lives are on display for the entire world to see. People watch shows like Jersey Shore to make themselves feel better about the lives they lead--watching other people live outrageous lives makes you stop and go "hmm...well at least I'm not like that. At least I don't do that. My life is actually pretty normal, thank goodness."

I feel like to some degree, The Hunger Games comments on this big brother "let's watch the lives of people 24/7" phenomenon pretty well--but with a twist. Like we discussed, Collins was inspired to write this series by flipping back and forth between reality TV and war coverage. It makes me think about the way war has been media-tized...is that a word?... made media-centric in recent history. War was not always covered in the media the way it is today. It used to be just newspaper reports, and for a long time, war photography wasn't shown to the public. But now, almost every news broadcast on every channel is featuring video of war. watching war news coverage is different than, say, watching a war movie. These are real people, real soldiers, fighting and dying on our television screens. This, coupled with the reality TV cameras following around real people for entertainment, is really what makes up the underlying theme of The Hunger Games. All the people in the Capitol--and the districts--are gathered around the television, watching these people--REAL kids--kill each other. And for the Capitol (and probably the career districts too) this is for entertainment. What does this say about our society today, that we are willing to sit around the television and watch the lives of real people fall apart just because it's "entertaining?" It's really kind of dismal when you think about it.

I mean, I doubt that watching war coverage is at all entertaining for anyone, but it's the same general idea--these aren't made up characters pretending to fight in a war. They are real people fighting a real war, while we are safe at home watching coverage on TV.

I hope this makes sense. I'm kind of sitting here, typing this out, trying to make sense of these thoughts myself. I'm not sure if it's working.

4 comments:

  1. I definitely agree with your point about America being an entertainment-based society ever since its beginnings - that makes perfect sense and is proven by this entire class and everything we've studied in it. But I'm not so sure about the whole war on tv thing as being entertaining. I think people watch updates about the war on the news because they want to be involved and informed and strictly up-to-date with everything going on. However, the visual part of it is definitely questionable. If news sites were more descriptive about details of the war in a way that wasn't through the aid of cameras, I think it would be just as effective in informing the public as to what's current in the war zone. The whole idea of watching real soldiers dying for x reasons is pretty disturbing and actually really unneccessary if you ask me. Who is that benefitting? Good points brought up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, I wasn't trying to say that war coverage is entertaining at all. I wasn't sure how to word it to make it clear. But what you said about the visuals being questionable--that was the point I was going for.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I can definitely agree that our society revolves around the entertainment industry. I think that the use of media during times of war can be a touchy subject. Yes people like to be informed and it is great that we can now be more aware of the rest of the world than ever before. But like all media, the news is often skewed. This goes back to reality television. We can all enjoy it but we cannot always believe it is 100% true.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This does make sense, and I see your train of thought, and it's on-track and interesting. I'd have liked you to make stronger connections though, especially since you're already familiar with the term, between Hunger Games, art, mimesis and spectacle. You mention them, but don't quite pursue your own train of thought. Also, avoid generalizations about what 'used to be' vs now. Of course war photography was shown to the public. It was made for the public. Remember the Civil War battlefield photos we saw? Remember the bodies, repositioned to fit particular narratives? It was those narratives that sold newspapers. Additionally, I was little during the Vietnam War, and I distinctly remember, every single day, graphic news footage of bombing, body counts--them and us, kept like football scores, the famous Life Magazine photograph of the little girl running from the napalmed fireball that had been her village, and later, image after image, on tv and newspapers, of flag-draped coffins coming home. We actually see _less_ of that now. Our 'war footage' now is stock photography of stuff exploding.

    ReplyDelete