Heroes can be cultural, classical, popular or personal. Celebrities are distractions
of public conscience. American media personnel merely pose questions and
entertain viewers – and it reflects our overall and relative moral fabric. Values
are fluid.
Morality is the “sanctity of the individual,” said Sydney Pollack
speaking about the reflection in popular movies of American moral ideas. Film
disiplays an ever-evolving American culture. There are “older values” still
remembered from the advent of modern films from the 1930s – 1960s. Moviemaker Pollack
says six men then controlled American film and cultural influence. Gone are
tales of Ulysses, Gary Cooper’s Sgt. York and Superman. (Pollack, 454) Love, violence and evolving social custom
rule now.
The writer and producer asserts that good movies entertain, make money
and show a heroic character – often an underdog – triumphing with motives
driven by day-to-day life. Whether the protagonist is male or female, they
often fight against injustice. The man may be more violent or physical about
it, but the female heroes can be if provoked. They often, however, are equally
if not more cunning. Either way, the movies deliver.
All of these things also involve a so-called cult of celebrity, Such
heroes in American life, the Huffington
Post asserts, can vary from Moses to Lady Gaga. Rabbi E.H. Yoffie calls
celebrities and heroes essential to American life, just as our readings assert.
He says, in relevant part, that young Americans – even religious ones – look at
celebrities as an entertaining distraction, not heroes. But Yoffie says if
parents want to imbue some sense of personal heroism and admiration, they
should give their kids something to look up to. The Bible, the rabbi asserts,
gives traditional heroes traditional-value acclaim. And if parents want to
extol virtues and their own lead-by-example potential, they could point to the
first responders of 9/11: People who stepped up when the nation needed them.
They were not celebrities, but they were and are still heroes. See Yoffie’s
assertion that we fret too much about cultural distractions, celebrity and the
media, and not enough about the heroes in our midst: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-eric-h-yoffie/lady-gaga-charlie-sheen-a_b_808042.html
The need for distracting entertainment also is shown in movies because
it’s what people buy. Human life is more disposable, Pollack asserts, because
the people want to be entertained, and therefore sanctity gives way to Hollyood
sensationalism. His assertion is that it does not make us lesser persons.
Similarly, love, marriage and how they are portrayed “belong to the consumer,”
Pollack asserts. And as such, the trepidations of movie pioneers gave way to
the need for subsidiaries of large corporations to make a profit. “Making
films,” the famed creator asserts, is “a merger of two antithetical things:
Some form of art and sheer commerce.”
(Pollack 455).
Pollack seeks truth, but it is relative, living in a character from
moment to moment. The public gets what the viewers want, and not what the
producer thinks they should have. The
latter idea is “just plain wishful thinking about how to improve society,”
Pollack went further when he told his conference audience concerned about movie
mores:
“I share your
nostalgia for some of those lost traditional values, but attempting to
reinstall them by arbitrarily putting them into movies when they don’t exist in
everyday life will not get people to go to the movies or put those values back
into life. I wish it were that simple.” (Pollack 458)
Pollack’s film have a “spine” and an underlaying framework or
“armature.” They revolve around “some argument that fascinates me” that
invariably is played out by heroes. They often are conveniently marketable celebrities
of the day. (Pollack 458-46) He does a film strictly about “arguments,” not
trashing values he believes are fair. He avers that “most of our films pro the
underdog. … There’s usually a system – or a bureaucracy – to triumph over.” Yet
Pollack argues durability: “American culture is general. … America
has the most easily digestible culture” compared to (more-culturally
restrictive) Indian or Japanese societies. (Pollack 461)
He points out that movies made despite fears that they would not appeal
to culture “paid off handsomely, because there are no rules.” He lets viewers
decide a film’s value.
The goal of movies, heroes, celebrities is not to agree with viewers,
but to argue with them. So Pollock’s movies are both “reasonably intelligent”
and seek to entertain. The role of heroes, celebrities, writers, producers and
filmkakers is “rather to make the whole world cry than (just) 17 intellectuals
in a classroom.”
Pollack’s goal to explore
arguments through movies compels the audience to evaluate the questions
presented. They hold it up against the backdrop of their own personal heroes,
cultural protagonists and popular celebrities playing a role or commenting on news
of the day. It’s subjective because it overlays the viewer’s framework and
perspective. The result can be anger, dispassionate analysis, or uplifting thought-provoking
messages. Just don’t “bore the pants off” the audience. (Pollack 457)
The moviemaker has found heroic “motives that are hidden in day-to-day
life.” (Pollack 457) Rabbi Yoffie similarly extols 9/11’s responders, urging
the public to look beyond celebrities to find true American heroes. Celebrities
just come along for the ride. Popular media exist to distract/entertain. True
values come from upbringing and life lessons’ moral teaching. We skin our
knuckles in life. We need a break via mock heroes, real role-model personal
heroes and celebrities/popular culture. Our values should survive filmed moral arguments
played by stars in thought-provoking movies. That’s true even when our general
culture and values evolve as dynamically as our daily existence.
References:
“Cult of Celebrity,” May 25, 2011. The Huffington Post
Retrieved from:
“Lady Gaga,
Charlie Sheen and Moses: Celebrities and Heroes in American Life”
(Yoffie, E.H.) May
25, 2011 . The Huffington Post
Retrieved from:
“The Way We Are” (Pollack, S.)
Common Culture: Reading
and Writing about American Popular Culture
(Petracca, M.,
Sorapure, M.) 2012 University of California Santa Barbara
Seventh
Edition, Pearson, pp 453-463
No comments:
Post a Comment