Havent really put anything here in a while so heres the main body of a project i was working on about plastic surgery. I wanted to interview a plastic surgeon but none of the people i spoke to got back to me. Maybe il do it better during the summer. It was pretty rushed, but it has the bones and research for a good feature article.
My hypothesis is that the presentation and attention given to cosmetic surgery reflects a society that is obsessed with image. Furthermore I believe that the representation of cosmetic surgery on “reality television” programmes encourage people who ordinarily wouldn’t, to have surgery performed on themselves. The media both reflects and generates social activity and both aspects must be explored in order to understand the processes at work. I also believe that the mainstream media is manipulating their consumers by exploiting their insecurities and promoting a destructive message that equates wealth with happiness. The shows which I will be examining are The Swan, Extreme Makeover, and I Want A Famous Face. The Swan is a competitive show in which all the contestants undergo full body plastic surgery and then must compete against each other for a cash prize. On Extreme Makeover each show focuses on one particapant who has full body plastic surgery and examines the processes involved. On I Want A Famous Face a particant will undergo facial reconstruction with the aim that afterwards they will look like their preferred celebrity. While each of these shows have specific nuances, the basic premise is the same, therefore unless I make particular reference to a show I will be discussing them as a whole.
To begin with I would like to tackle the claim of these shows to represent “reality”. The label of “reality television” has always been a troublesome one. Some people believe that the name is an inaccurate description for several styles of program included in this genre. The viewer of these shows cannot see what is being edited. The process involved in a cosmetic makeover is a lengthy one that cannot be justifiably presented in a twenty or thirty minutes. The shows lack much variety and generally follow the same pattern- this leads the analyst to ask if the creators deliberately set up the show in such a way that leads to a favourable result time and time again.
An interesting theorist to look at with regard to these shows is the postmodernist Jean Baudrillard who made some significant contributions to the Semiotics and the study of signs. He believed that reality disappears underneath the interchangeability of signs, and this can be seen clearly on television shows about cosmetic surgery, especially when looking at how exactly the products of surgery is consumed and how beauty is a sign for success and those with the power to alter their appearance have greater symbolic power in society. Baudrillard thought that all purchases, because they always signify something socially, have their fetishistic side. The human obsession with perfection has reached a fetish-like scale, and the image of a flawless body has come to symbolise the object of attraction. His ideas about hyperreality could also be important in analysing reality television shows. Hyperreality is a means to characterise the way consciousness defines what is actually "real" in a world where a multitude of media can radically shape and filter the original event or experience being depicted. The media has become so complex and sophisticated that determining what is real can often be difficult.
Plastic surgery has existed in various guises for many years and reflects mans natural desire for self improvement. There is nothing good or bad about wanting to be better- it is a natural impulse, but when this desire is exploited for higher TV ratings or direct consumption we should be offended. When plastic surgery is highly necessary- in the case where an accident left someone disfigured or where not having plastic surgery poses a health risk, no-one can make a moral judgement. However there are those who believe that the “unnecessary” use of plastic surgery is negative influence in society. Their argument is the that widespread practice of plastic surgery creates or adds to a widespread obsession with image which is deemed as “fake” and dehumanising. Such people would argue that everyone is beautiful and that there is no need to “fix” anything and individuals should be judged not on their appearance but by their inner beauty. The opposing side to this argument would be that it is everyone’s free choice to alter their appearance and if you are unhappy with a certain aspect of your body you should be free to change it. It is this side that the media tends to side with and it is no coincidence that it is also this side that reflects the ideals of the free market economy.
It is interesting when applying Toderov’s equilibrium theory to these shows. His theory identifies and labels a changing state of affairs occurring throughout the narrative. These shows are also definite narratives as a discernable story can be seen to take place. For Toderov the five points of changing are equilibrium, disruption, recognition, attempt and return to a new equilibrium or the restoration of a new equilibrium. But in the case of these makeover shows the first stage or status quo is not present. The patient or contestant’s starting point is disruption. Their life is disrupted because they are unhappy with their body or feel that their body restricts them from participating in life to its fullest. The recognition takes place when the doctors and presenters help the patient to realise that s/he needs surgery to alleviate the problem. The surgery becomes a metaphor for the next stage- attempt, as the doctors “attempt” to fix him/her. The return or restoration is again problematic because there was no beginning equilibrium. Something different takes place- perhaps this is meant to signify the beginning of something new for the patient; being born for the first time. But what are the implications for the lack of equilibrium at the beginning of the show? Perhaps it sends the message that balance is unthinkable if you have an undesirable physical appearance. There simply isn’t a way to be happy with yourself. The possibility of coming to terms mentally with our physical insecurities is not explored at all. Surgery is seen as the only option available. And if the surgery does not result in the long term satisfaction of the patient the road for repeat procedures is left wide open.
Results from a study conducted by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons show that plastic surgery reality TV shows influence patients to have surgery. According to the study, published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, first time patients seeking cosmetic surgery are directly influenced to have a procedure by the shows they watch. The study examined 42 cosmetic surgery patients. Fifty seven percent of patients were considered high-intensity viewers of plastic surgery shows, regularly watching at least one ongoing programme. Patients in the high-intensity category reported a greater influence from television and the media to pursue cosmetic plastic surgery, felt more knowledgeable about plastic surgery in general and believed plastic surgery reality television shows were more similar to real-life than low-intensity viewers did. In addition four out of five people reported television directly influenced them to pursue a cosmetic surgery procedure, with nearly one-third very much or moderately influenced. Shows considered in this study included Extreme Makeover, The Swan, I Want A Famous Face, Plastic Surgery: Before and After, Dr. 90210 and Miami Slice. “It is unfortunate that patients are turning toward the entertainment industry for educational information- we had hoped for different results” said Dr. John Persing, MD, ASPS Member Surgeon and study co-author. “These shows may create unrealistic expectations about what plastic surgery can do for you.” According to ASPS statistics nearly 11 million cosmetic plastic surgery procedures were performed in 2006 up 7 percent from 2005.
Fashion magazines advertising plastic reconstruction, reality television shows about cosmetic surgeries and TV shows like Nip/Tuck exist because there is a demand for them. These shows and media products focus on people who want to improve their appearance and are consumed by people who want to improve their appearance. Therefore media is reflecting society, but also influencing it as people tend to imitate and draw inspiration from what they see on a screen or in a glossy magazine. However there is a lot of resistance to these shows. A simple google search will reveal a multitude of critics slamming the culture of perfection worship and accusing the producers of these show of damaging and exploiting people. Therefore, these shows are definitely not representative of these peoples views. So the media simultaneously reflects some peoples views and forgets others.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Thursday, April 3, 2008
NOBODY LISTENS TO TECHNO?
In a video I watched on the internet recently, punk hero Henry Rollins, in a skit about techno music, asks “What came first: the shitty music or the shitty drugs?” before launching into an ignorant rant attacking techno music. The way he tells it all electronic music is made by mindless monkeys and the whole scene is superficial. That would be like me reducing all punk music to Blink 182 or saying all hip-hop sounds like 50 Cent. I found it surprising that a musician would blindly dismiss what I regard to be as one of the most innovative forms of expression and portray it as boring repetitive music that requires chemicals to be enjoyed. But the belief that dance music is dominated by a drug culture and that it doesn’t require talent is, while false, a widespread assumption. This could not be farther from the truth. So I’d like to take a moment to highlight the intricate processes of techno and show my appreciation for this often misjudged genre.
Most people have the wrong idea about techno music and its surrounding culture. Given its diversity there is no end all definition of techno but Jeff Mills comes close when he says “It’s the process of trying to describe something in the future musically”. Futuristic ideas and a forward thinking perspective is central to understanding techno music. Techno originated in Detroit during the early 80’s and was influenced a number of elements including science fiction literature, industrial architecture and Funk music. Similar to experimental musicians such as Pink Floyd, early innovators sought to use new technology to create futuristic sounds and music. These artists found that they could bring mechanical instruments to life; in effect passing their spirit from the body into a machine, and produce new music; infecting disco with electronics. Ralf Hutter, member of seminal German techno group Kraftwerk said that the ‘soul’ of the machines has always been part of his music. While this idea might seem rather esoteric and “out there”, in the early days of techno there were no drugs to be seen. Producers were interested only in experimenting with sounds and all their money was invested in drum machines and synthesisers.
As techno spread, developed and mutated, the spirit of innovation remained. Artists producing techno tracks are constantly attempting to push the limits of their musical equipment and many modify or build their own hardware. The techno community is more often made up of nerdish enthusiasts slaving over their compositions rather than pill popping rock stars. This is a highly democratic genre, that for better or worse, anyone can become involved in. Whether what you produce is good relies on your patience, intuition and talent. In the same way that it takes skill and finesse to play a guitar well so too does it take skill and finesse to use a drum machine or a sequencer correctly and make all the elements combine to create a likeable track. In the same way that it takes vision and intelligence to put a band together so too are these qualities essential for an electronic music producer. For most DJs and producers drugs don’t feature in their schedule of musical experimentation, practice, performance and promotion. While there does exist the clichéd image of the superstar DJ living a hedonistic lifestyle of sex, drugs and pounding bass lines, such artists are rarely that good, and they shouldn’t be taken as representative of the culture or genre as a whole.
One area of Rollins attack is the character of those involved in techno, and he questions whether they should be called musicians. He claims that they are super self important and “music thieves”. I find this accusation stunning as I have found the techno community nationally and internationally to be unpretentious and tolerant. Iv seen DJs engage with crowds in a way Iv never seen other types of musicians, and performers are often eager to involve the audience. Electronic producers are generally the first to admit that they don’t know everything, and that a lot of the production experience is about discovery and learning. There is always new equipment to be tested and played with. Usually electronic artists are prepared to listen to and encourage others. There are dozens of internet forums, such as www.idmforums.com, dedicated to helpful advice on how to buy and use equipment and production tips. These are lessons and tricks not documented elsewhere and the community wants to pass on these skills to others. A “do it yourself” attitude is central to techno, but there are always others you can learn from.
With techno music everyone is trying to bring something new to the table. Creating your own personal touch is important and because of the wide range of techniques involved this is possible. In this way it is less limited than other music genres that might rely on more organic sounds in that there is no strict formula or set of instruments the producer is confined to. Often the studio itself becomes its own instrument and the musician may experiment with where different devices are located and connected. It is true that some artists make generic and cheesy songs; but as a genre becomes more popular and commercial people will appear who are interested in making a quick buck with a rubbish song. To write off an entire genre because of a few bad eggs is short-sighted. For every awful Euro trash anthem there are thousands of undiscovered techno tracks.
Another complaint people have with techno and dance music is that artists take samples from other songs and that this in some way “lessens” the originality of the new song. Of course if artists over-rely on a sample to be the main body of a song this can be true. However, when a producer uses an old sample his aim is to make that sample “new” by placing it into the track in an inventive and appropriate fashion that wasn’t thought of before, but that works. The process involves recycling and manipulation and is much more sophisticated that just “stealing” a sample and plagiarising someone else’s song to make your own sound better.
One major problem people have with techno culture is that it is regarded as drug-centric and that drugs are essential for appreciation of the music. I first got into electronic music at a very early age. I just about remember recording mixes off Atlantic 252 and dancing around my sitting room. While I had no understanding of how these sounds were produced I was hooked by their energy and power. Since then I have explored most other musical avenues but it is always dance music which I come back to and it stems from that original love of a hypnotic beat. Me and many other I know share this appreciation which has nothing to do with drugs. I was a techno fan years before I knew what a drug was. However there is an undeniable connection between recreational drugs and dance music. But drugs are a part of many music and party scenes, not just the dance scene. Drugs have been a part of the world of popular music since the dawn of time. They are a part of the culture of youth. It is not appropriate to think of techno music as being unique for its connections with illegal drugs. Enthusiasts are often of the opinion that drugs like ecstasy are a nuisance which ruin the reputation of techno culture. Among the ideas that resonate around the techno culture are the messages of respect and responsibility. The tragedies that have occurred in connection with ecstasy have been a source of regret and meditation for the techno community. Increased drug use, the proliferation of adulterated ecstasy tablets and involvement in criminal activity have forced many event organisers and music producers to re-evaluate the direction of techno. Thankfully those attending raves and concerts have recently been exercising more caution recently and fans attention has been diverted away from drug use and towards the music itself and its appreciation.
By the end of Rollins diatribe I felt sorry for him. Sorry that for him, and many others, their impression of this strange and beautiful music is so completely inaccurate. Few experiences in my life can compare with when I saw The Chemical Brothers or Daft Punk live, or the first time I listened to Aphex Twin’s Selected Ambient Works or the first time I went to a rave. Rollins will probably never see a DJ play a 7 hour set building up and breaking down movements like a maestro. He will never be mesmerised by the intuitive subtleness of minimal techno or dance wildly to dirty French electro. He will continue to spread his misplaced anger and animosity. Which is sad, because techno has an everlasting amount of potential and positive energy.
Most people have the wrong idea about techno music and its surrounding culture. Given its diversity there is no end all definition of techno but Jeff Mills comes close when he says “It’s the process of trying to describe something in the future musically”. Futuristic ideas and a forward thinking perspective is central to understanding techno music. Techno originated in Detroit during the early 80’s and was influenced a number of elements including science fiction literature, industrial architecture and Funk music. Similar to experimental musicians such as Pink Floyd, early innovators sought to use new technology to create futuristic sounds and music. These artists found that they could bring mechanical instruments to life; in effect passing their spirit from the body into a machine, and produce new music; infecting disco with electronics. Ralf Hutter, member of seminal German techno group Kraftwerk said that the ‘soul’ of the machines has always been part of his music. While this idea might seem rather esoteric and “out there”, in the early days of techno there were no drugs to be seen. Producers were interested only in experimenting with sounds and all their money was invested in drum machines and synthesisers.
As techno spread, developed and mutated, the spirit of innovation remained. Artists producing techno tracks are constantly attempting to push the limits of their musical equipment and many modify or build their own hardware. The techno community is more often made up of nerdish enthusiasts slaving over their compositions rather than pill popping rock stars. This is a highly democratic genre, that for better or worse, anyone can become involved in. Whether what you produce is good relies on your patience, intuition and talent. In the same way that it takes skill and finesse to play a guitar well so too does it take skill and finesse to use a drum machine or a sequencer correctly and make all the elements combine to create a likeable track. In the same way that it takes vision and intelligence to put a band together so too are these qualities essential for an electronic music producer. For most DJs and producers drugs don’t feature in their schedule of musical experimentation, practice, performance and promotion. While there does exist the clichéd image of the superstar DJ living a hedonistic lifestyle of sex, drugs and pounding bass lines, such artists are rarely that good, and they shouldn’t be taken as representative of the culture or genre as a whole.
One area of Rollins attack is the character of those involved in techno, and he questions whether they should be called musicians. He claims that they are super self important and “music thieves”. I find this accusation stunning as I have found the techno community nationally and internationally to be unpretentious and tolerant. Iv seen DJs engage with crowds in a way Iv never seen other types of musicians, and performers are often eager to involve the audience. Electronic producers are generally the first to admit that they don’t know everything, and that a lot of the production experience is about discovery and learning. There is always new equipment to be tested and played with. Usually electronic artists are prepared to listen to and encourage others. There are dozens of internet forums, such as www.idmforums.com, dedicated to helpful advice on how to buy and use equipment and production tips. These are lessons and tricks not documented elsewhere and the community wants to pass on these skills to others. A “do it yourself” attitude is central to techno, but there are always others you can learn from.
With techno music everyone is trying to bring something new to the table. Creating your own personal touch is important and because of the wide range of techniques involved this is possible. In this way it is less limited than other music genres that might rely on more organic sounds in that there is no strict formula or set of instruments the producer is confined to. Often the studio itself becomes its own instrument and the musician may experiment with where different devices are located and connected. It is true that some artists make generic and cheesy songs; but as a genre becomes more popular and commercial people will appear who are interested in making a quick buck with a rubbish song. To write off an entire genre because of a few bad eggs is short-sighted. For every awful Euro trash anthem there are thousands of undiscovered techno tracks.
Another complaint people have with techno and dance music is that artists take samples from other songs and that this in some way “lessens” the originality of the new song. Of course if artists over-rely on a sample to be the main body of a song this can be true. However, when a producer uses an old sample his aim is to make that sample “new” by placing it into the track in an inventive and appropriate fashion that wasn’t thought of before, but that works. The process involves recycling and manipulation and is much more sophisticated that just “stealing” a sample and plagiarising someone else’s song to make your own sound better.
One major problem people have with techno culture is that it is regarded as drug-centric and that drugs are essential for appreciation of the music. I first got into electronic music at a very early age. I just about remember recording mixes off Atlantic 252 and dancing around my sitting room. While I had no understanding of how these sounds were produced I was hooked by their energy and power. Since then I have explored most other musical avenues but it is always dance music which I come back to and it stems from that original love of a hypnotic beat. Me and many other I know share this appreciation which has nothing to do with drugs. I was a techno fan years before I knew what a drug was. However there is an undeniable connection between recreational drugs and dance music. But drugs are a part of many music and party scenes, not just the dance scene. Drugs have been a part of the world of popular music since the dawn of time. They are a part of the culture of youth. It is not appropriate to think of techno music as being unique for its connections with illegal drugs. Enthusiasts are often of the opinion that drugs like ecstasy are a nuisance which ruin the reputation of techno culture. Among the ideas that resonate around the techno culture are the messages of respect and responsibility. The tragedies that have occurred in connection with ecstasy have been a source of regret and meditation for the techno community. Increased drug use, the proliferation of adulterated ecstasy tablets and involvement in criminal activity have forced many event organisers and music producers to re-evaluate the direction of techno. Thankfully those attending raves and concerts have recently been exercising more caution recently and fans attention has been diverted away from drug use and towards the music itself and its appreciation.
By the end of Rollins diatribe I felt sorry for him. Sorry that for him, and many others, their impression of this strange and beautiful music is so completely inaccurate. Few experiences in my life can compare with when I saw The Chemical Brothers or Daft Punk live, or the first time I listened to Aphex Twin’s Selected Ambient Works or the first time I went to a rave. Rollins will probably never see a DJ play a 7 hour set building up and breaking down movements like a maestro. He will never be mesmerised by the intuitive subtleness of minimal techno or dance wildly to dirty French electro. He will continue to spread his misplaced anger and animosity. Which is sad, because techno has an everlasting amount of potential and positive energy.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Apathy
Every day on TV news broadcasts we listen to political leaders speak about the threat terrorists and far away nations pose to democracy and freedom. But I believe the greatest treat to democracy comes not from war or opposing ideologies but from the citizens of democracies themselves. A democracy is defined as “rule by the people”. This means that each citizen has an equal say in deciding how a government is run. We have the right to choose who to put into positions of power, and those elected have a responsibility to represent the electorate and their desires. Everyday issues such as how much we earn, how many hours we work, how our families are protected and the state of our roads, schools and hospitals are affected by politicians, who are given power by us. So who we choose to put into power is an important decision that everyone should consider carefully. Everyone should jump at the opportunity to make a difference and be heard. The government affects everyone and therefore everyone should have an interest in it. Not necessarily in parties and candidates, but in simple things like taxes and social issues that everyone is sure to have an opinion on, since it affects them. However a culture of political apathy is undermining the democratic process and nowhere is this more evident than among young people in this country.
But where does this apathy and disinterest come from? Why don’t young people care? Is Ireland so perfect that young people do not seek change? I don’t think so. Young people as a whole in Ireland have a resounding lack of belief in themselves and there are few factors to motivate or inspire them. Many young people chose not to become involved in politics because the choice was never given to them. How can you expect a group of people to pay attention if attention was never paid to them? The government are responsible for making the political process accessible to all. But the problem still remains that, even if all the information is available, there is a high possibility it will not be absorbed.
In 2004 a poll conducted by the National Youth Foundation in Ireland highlighted the widespread political apathy among Irish teenagers. 90% of respondents to the poll could not name a single MEP in their area and only half could name one of their local TDs. I spoke to Mary McGuiness, a journalism teacher at Galway Technical Institute who has extensive experience dealing with young people and she agrees that there is a high level of political apathy among young people in Ireland. I asked her what she thinks contributes to this: “There are a couple of things. For a start teenagers don’t ever actually have to watch the news, they live in a bubble, they listen to their iPods, they play console games, they don’t actually hear the news on the radio or see it on TV, they rarely discuss anything with their parents. A lot of them have absolutely no knowledge of what’s going on at all.” From this perspective it is easy to see how young people have become detached from the reality of politics- they live in a world dominated by entertainment and there is no room for examining government policies. Discussions on the current fashion trends take precedence over discussions on the current political climate. But according to Mary McGuiness, things weren’t always this way: “I am surprised because when I was in my 20’s Irish young people were the most politically aware people in Europe. Now it’s all gone and maybe when things are going well nobody is interested in politics. If we hit another slump maybe interest will pick up. If we don’t need change there is no reason to be interested.” It is an old cliché that affluence makes the youth complacent; but is it that simple? What do young people think of politicians themselves? The same NYF poll reports that three-quarters of respondents said they felt politicians did little to improve the lives of young people, while a majority also agreed with the phrase that "politicians are only in it for themselves". Mary McGuiness agrees with this. “Young people just say “Oh, they’re all the same, they’re all corrupt. What difference does it make? Politics makes no difference in life.” It is primarily this viewpoint and the lack of participation which is damaging democracy.
However, in a 2002 press release the National Youth Council of Ireland announced that they believed that apathy is not the full reason why young people don’t vote. The NYCI called for the government to “put in place a comprehensive, targeted action plan to increase voter turnout”. Voter turn out could be improved be such strategies as automatically registering citizens to vote on their 18th birthday and sending them a letter informing them that they are elegible to vote and holding elections at times when most people would be home. They attribute alienation as the reason for non participation, rather than apathy. The NYCI also “calls on all parties to make a concerted effort to include policies relevant to young people in their election manifestos in the following areas: First time buyers, private rented accommodation, educational funding, health care, motor insurance, drug policy, anti-racism policies.” It is true that politicians’ manifestos often include many issues that are too obscure and irrelevant to the lives of young people. The National Youth Council recognised that 37% of young people did not vote due to a lack of interest, disillusionment or a feeling that their vote would make no difference- this presents a challenge to those dealing with young people and also to the government. However they suggest that the government has a role to play in making politics accessible to young people: “It is a citizen’s duty to vote, but it is a government’s duty to make sure that they can do so as easily as possible.”
One group of young people, who you would expect to be politically aware but are in fact failing to display such awareness, are university students. At the moment the Union of Students in Ireland is facing a dilemma. All across the country students are failing to participate in student elections and the integrity of local Student Unions is being undermined. The problem is that the general student completes his or her course without once coming into contact with a member of the Students’ Union. The average student would probably find it difficult to describe what exactly the Students Union even does. This years NUIG Student Union Presidential election exhibited the lack of political activity at NUIG. While there were three names on the ballot sheet for President, only one of these was a serious candidate while the other two were jokes running a satirical campaign. Worse still only 10% of the student population turned out to vote. This trend is reflected all over the country and seriously discredits the idea that student leaders speak for all students. Many students ask themselves why they should bother voting. The is that every full time student is automatically a member of the Students’ Union. The Union gets part of the registration fee. By voting you are getting to decide how that money is spent by voting for someone whose manifesto you agree and by giving no preference to the person whose policies you disagree. Just like in governmental elections.
Stephen Conlon, an active member of the USI, wrote in the Irish Times that: “in modern Ireland the vast majority of students express little interest in [politics]. Students are much more interested in fast-tracking their education and entering the real world as quickly as possible. Students are increasingly apathetic, pacified by free education, a minimum wage and their first Opel Astra. Changes will only be brought about by individuals who are politically motivated- students are simply not interested.” Who are we to rely on so if the most educated young people in Ireland are unwilling to be involved in politics?
So what does the future hold for young voters? How will the current democratic deficit be solved? Have Irish young people become too isolated from the political arena in a post Celtic Tiger era? What can jolt them from distraction into action? Do we have to wait until conditions become bad before our youth population take an interest in shaping their future? Wouldn’t it be easier to take charge now and use our recent success to build a stable and sustainable nation which listens to everyone’s voice? Perhaps it’s true that the current political structures in place make it difficult for young people to become involved. The Government definitely has a role to play in opening up politics to the younger generation but groups can show how to vote and where and when, but what young people really need is a reason why. The reality is that young people lack inspiration and motivation, but they’re not stupid and usually more aware than statistics give them credit for. The reality of youth apathy is that young people have plenty of political opinions and concerns, although they might not look at them that way. If only they could turn off their iPods or pull themselves away from screens long enough to express themselves. The failure of young people to organise themselves and make demands means there is no need for politicians to include their demands in manifestos. What is needed is an organisation that brings the debate to young people and shows them, in a non-patronising way, that their voices matter and that democracy only works when everyone is involved.
But where does this apathy and disinterest come from? Why don’t young people care? Is Ireland so perfect that young people do not seek change? I don’t think so. Young people as a whole in Ireland have a resounding lack of belief in themselves and there are few factors to motivate or inspire them. Many young people chose not to become involved in politics because the choice was never given to them. How can you expect a group of people to pay attention if attention was never paid to them? The government are responsible for making the political process accessible to all. But the problem still remains that, even if all the information is available, there is a high possibility it will not be absorbed.
In 2004 a poll conducted by the National Youth Foundation in Ireland highlighted the widespread political apathy among Irish teenagers. 90% of respondents to the poll could not name a single MEP in their area and only half could name one of their local TDs. I spoke to Mary McGuiness, a journalism teacher at Galway Technical Institute who has extensive experience dealing with young people and she agrees that there is a high level of political apathy among young people in Ireland. I asked her what she thinks contributes to this: “There are a couple of things. For a start teenagers don’t ever actually have to watch the news, they live in a bubble, they listen to their iPods, they play console games, they don’t actually hear the news on the radio or see it on TV, they rarely discuss anything with their parents. A lot of them have absolutely no knowledge of what’s going on at all.” From this perspective it is easy to see how young people have become detached from the reality of politics- they live in a world dominated by entertainment and there is no room for examining government policies. Discussions on the current fashion trends take precedence over discussions on the current political climate. But according to Mary McGuiness, things weren’t always this way: “I am surprised because when I was in my 20’s Irish young people were the most politically aware people in Europe. Now it’s all gone and maybe when things are going well nobody is interested in politics. If we hit another slump maybe interest will pick up. If we don’t need change there is no reason to be interested.” It is an old cliché that affluence makes the youth complacent; but is it that simple? What do young people think of politicians themselves? The same NYF poll reports that three-quarters of respondents said they felt politicians did little to improve the lives of young people, while a majority also agreed with the phrase that "politicians are only in it for themselves". Mary McGuiness agrees with this. “Young people just say “Oh, they’re all the same, they’re all corrupt. What difference does it make? Politics makes no difference in life.” It is primarily this viewpoint and the lack of participation which is damaging democracy.
However, in a 2002 press release the National Youth Council of Ireland announced that they believed that apathy is not the full reason why young people don’t vote. The NYCI called for the government to “put in place a comprehensive, targeted action plan to increase voter turnout”. Voter turn out could be improved be such strategies as automatically registering citizens to vote on their 18th birthday and sending them a letter informing them that they are elegible to vote and holding elections at times when most people would be home. They attribute alienation as the reason for non participation, rather than apathy. The NYCI also “calls on all parties to make a concerted effort to include policies relevant to young people in their election manifestos in the following areas: First time buyers, private rented accommodation, educational funding, health care, motor insurance, drug policy, anti-racism policies.” It is true that politicians’ manifestos often include many issues that are too obscure and irrelevant to the lives of young people. The National Youth Council recognised that 37% of young people did not vote due to a lack of interest, disillusionment or a feeling that their vote would make no difference- this presents a challenge to those dealing with young people and also to the government. However they suggest that the government has a role to play in making politics accessible to young people: “It is a citizen’s duty to vote, but it is a government’s duty to make sure that they can do so as easily as possible.”
One group of young people, who you would expect to be politically aware but are in fact failing to display such awareness, are university students. At the moment the Union of Students in Ireland is facing a dilemma. All across the country students are failing to participate in student elections and the integrity of local Student Unions is being undermined. The problem is that the general student completes his or her course without once coming into contact with a member of the Students’ Union. The average student would probably find it difficult to describe what exactly the Students Union even does. This years NUIG Student Union Presidential election exhibited the lack of political activity at NUIG. While there were three names on the ballot sheet for President, only one of these was a serious candidate while the other two were jokes running a satirical campaign. Worse still only 10% of the student population turned out to vote. This trend is reflected all over the country and seriously discredits the idea that student leaders speak for all students. Many students ask themselves why they should bother voting. The is that every full time student is automatically a member of the Students’ Union. The Union gets part of the registration fee. By voting you are getting to decide how that money is spent by voting for someone whose manifesto you agree and by giving no preference to the person whose policies you disagree. Just like in governmental elections.
Stephen Conlon, an active member of the USI, wrote in the Irish Times that: “in modern Ireland the vast majority of students express little interest in [politics]. Students are much more interested in fast-tracking their education and entering the real world as quickly as possible. Students are increasingly apathetic, pacified by free education, a minimum wage and their first Opel Astra. Changes will only be brought about by individuals who are politically motivated- students are simply not interested.” Who are we to rely on so if the most educated young people in Ireland are unwilling to be involved in politics?
So what does the future hold for young voters? How will the current democratic deficit be solved? Have Irish young people become too isolated from the political arena in a post Celtic Tiger era? What can jolt them from distraction into action? Do we have to wait until conditions become bad before our youth population take an interest in shaping their future? Wouldn’t it be easier to take charge now and use our recent success to build a stable and sustainable nation which listens to everyone’s voice? Perhaps it’s true that the current political structures in place make it difficult for young people to become involved. The Government definitely has a role to play in opening up politics to the younger generation but groups can show how to vote and where and when, but what young people really need is a reason why. The reality is that young people lack inspiration and motivation, but they’re not stupid and usually more aware than statistics give them credit for. The reality of youth apathy is that young people have plenty of political opinions and concerns, although they might not look at them that way. If only they could turn off their iPods or pull themselves away from screens long enough to express themselves. The failure of young people to organise themselves and make demands means there is no need for politicians to include their demands in manifestos. What is needed is an organisation that brings the debate to young people and shows them, in a non-patronising way, that their voices matter and that democracy only works when everyone is involved.
Friday, March 7, 2008
NUIG Student Elections 2008
Yesterday marked the commencement of the annual NUIG student elections for the positions of President, Welfare Officer and Education Officer. While many members of the Literary and Debating society will be excited, generally these times of year are of little interest to most students. The general student completes his or her course without once coming into contact with a member of the Students Union. The average student would probably find it difficult to tell you what the Students Union even do. That being said the elections are important and it is crucial who represents the college and who makes decisions about student welfare and education. Students should be interested, but are not- whether it is due to apathy and indifference or a lack of knowledge about the students union. Perhaps if students knew that the Students Union of Ireland are continuously defending free fees for Irish students from government policy makers who are trying to put limits and conditions on our free fees scheme they might reconsider their lack of concern. Perhaps student leaders have a responsibility to articulate more effectively to the student community the goings on of the unions. Whatever the reason for disinterest in student politics the turn out yesterday was at a usual low.
One possibility for students not voting might have been that the result for the most important position, that of Student President, was already decided. There were three candidates running for the position of president but two of them were “joke” candidates, who ran questionably funny satirical campaigns. Both portrayed themselves as budding fascist dictators who were prepared to take dramatic action should they win. “I wish to liberate the students from their naïve attachments to concepts like democracy and freedom, and embrace la Vida Buena an evil tyrant can offer them” ran a line from Sean Butlers’ manifesto. A second year Arts student who has ran as a joke in a previous student election, Butler says he would combat student apathy “with incentives like guns and tasers. You’d be surprised how much people start caring when they’re staring down the barrel of an Uzi, facing a life sentence in the acid mines.
Juxtaposed beside posters of friendly faces all spouting the same old rhetoric about improving conditions for students in every way imaginable, these farcical characters brought much needed humour and humanity to the election. Butler, in his military uniform complete with sword and sunglasses made the serious candidates appear amateur. The other “joke” contender for Student President was Mike Spring, a man whom I have had the pleasure of speaking to from time to time. Hailing from Kildare this History and Sociology student is definitely capable of running a serious campaign, but this is his second satirical crusade. When asked by SIN newspaper why he was running for president and why students should vote for him he replied “because I feel that the student body has languished under poor guidance for too long. The student body is an awesome prospective force whose potential is constantly sapped by weak management from those above. I have sat through three different presidencies in my time here and haven’t seen one decent student riot… I hope to change all that… I believe in death, destruction, chaos filth and greed. I am the embodiment of the morals and ethics that dictate our time. I stand strongly in favour of arbitrary violence, discrimination, reckless abandon, haphazard governance and casual prejudice. People have traditionally demonstrated a propensity for these traits in their leaders, so I think I’m the guy for the job.” Wow, Mike. Read Nietzsche or listen to punk much?
The only serious candidate for the presidency was Muireann O’Dwyer, a Final Arts student who is studying English and Philosophy and currently the Societies chairperson and former auditor of the Human Rights society. Her manifesto included the usual speel about re-establishing the Union presence on campus and forwarding the student agenda but to give her credit she didn’t let the fact that there were no other real competitors affect how her campaign was run. Talking to people who know a lot more than me about this, (and I would trust their opinions more than campaign posters) I gathered that she is a very adept person who has already done a lot of positive work for NUIG and the college will benefit from her presidency. Her website is here if you are interested. What I found interesting is her stand on student apathy- “Students are more uninformed than apathetic, to be fair. As for combating it, first find out what students want. This can be done through a survey… Second, give the students what they want.” Parking spaces for SUVs maybe? Cheap beer? In any matter I’m sure she’ll be a good president. Here are the results: 1578 people voted (less than 10% of the amount of students attending NUIG), 234 voted for Butler. 274 voted for Spring, 88 voted to reopen nominations and 936 voted for the new president, M O’Dwyer. When I saw those results this morning I was surprised to see the joke candidates got so many votes since everyone voting for them knew (hopefully) that it was a wasted vote.
Looking at the posters and manifestos of the candidates involved in the other positions- Welfare and Education, it is difficult to see many differences between them. And that is what Hustings is for- the Hustings debate last Wednesday is designed to give students a proper sense of the candidates and how effective they’ll be as union members. This gives people a view of the policies behind the candidates, and perhaps just as important- the candidates behind the policies. Everyone has similar ideas and there are only so many ways you can phrase them. Hustings tells a lot about who’s prepared and who has plans to implement their ideas and not just manifesto pipe dreams. Regan and Fahy won Welfare and Education respectively. Personally if I had a vote I would only have voted for a Welfare candidate who saw that the kayak clubhouse needs to be re-opened for parties and Aisling Fahy seemed like a good bet for Education?
Last year there were four serious candidates for SU president. The fact that there was only one this year should be shocking, but it isn’t really. It’s embarrassing and depressing that out of such a huge college only one person thinks that they would be able to represent and make decisions for the college. Is this evidence that it doesn’t matter who is president? Last years President James Hope, who I met once or twice always seemed busy. The job is not an easy one, or a well paid one, but it is rewarding and it does make a difference. Many students ask themselves why they should bother voting. The main reason would be that every full time student is a member of the Students’ Union during their time in college. The union gets part of your registration fee; therefore you are paying a registration fee. By voting you are getting to decide how that money will be spent by voting for someone whose manifesto you agree with and by giving no preference to the person whose policies you disagree with. That’s why, at the bare minimum, a student should vote. There are of course a multitude of other reasons. Maybe, like Sean Butler suggests, people won’t care until they are suffering, or maybe the students are just uninformed. Either way the state of student politics in Galway has a long way to go.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
One More Reason Not To Go To Mass
Today while I should’ve been at college I was listening to Joe Duffy’s morning show on RTE Radio One; something I’ve never actually done before, despite the shows popularity. Today’s show centred on Limerick priest Terry O’Connell who has openly opposed a Jesuit schools talent show which includes a magic show to raise funds for a trip to Lourdes. His grievance was that it was wrong for a magic show to be performed in a Christian/Catholic setting because “magic is considered an abhorrence in the Old Testament and it's appalling to think that it's being used to support a church trip”. I gathered that his argument was that only God or a prophet could perform miracles and that performing or believing in magic is some form of worshipping false gods or involvement in in some form of occultist practices. It could be argued that even giving the impression of doing something impossible- which is what magic and illusionary tricks do, can be seen as disrespectful to God, Jesus or the Bible, but you’d have to be one hell of a zealot to criticise a harmless magic show.
Throughout the show I thought the man was of questionable sanity. His on-air candour was one of smug holier-than-thou preaching and self assured shock. His opposition at the offending show was in theory understandable, but only from an extremely fundamental perspective. It is written in the bible that followers should not be involved in any forms of sorcery or magic for the reason that the followers should have no other “other worldly” beliefs or views other than what the bible tells them. Absolute faith is needed I order for a religion to succeed. Sadly some people remain so tied to the letter of the religious laws that they are incapable of forming their own ideas or thoughts. To Terry O’Connell the matter was as simple as “the Bible says it’s wrong to perform magic, so it’s wrong and if you are involved in this then you have no right to call yourself a Christian”. He also made no allowances for what was considered “magic”. To him magic encompassed everything from casting spells and devil worship to making a rabbit appear out of a hat or changing the colour of a handkerchief. It raised the question of how appropriate or wise is it to live your life and make your decisions according to the rules written in the Bible. The idea that the teachings of the Bible were open for interpretation was unacceptable for O’Connell. These are, after all, the words of God.
Many people rang in trying to make sense of his argument, which wasn’t available for compromise. Callers included people who performed magic tricks (who O’Connell referred to as “sorcerers”) who expressed how harmless their hobbies were, the distressed parents of the children involved and ordinary people giving their opinions on the priests statements. The most interesting responses came from fellow priests who were trying to get through to the priest that the magic show was an inoffensive entertaining act that the children had worked hard at to amuse their peers at a fund-raising event and that nothing “bad” or misleading was involved. One priest spoke on how he himself performed a few magic tricks and that it had never crossed his mind that there would be anything disrespectful to God involved. Terry O’Connell’s response was that any priest who performed anything like that should question their priesthood and they should be ashamed of themselves.
One “sorcerer” who had been performing for years to audiences of all ages and walks of life and very often as part of charity work was angered that the priest should question his Catholic authenticity. Joe Duffy also pointed out that it was a serious and wide teaching allegation to say that anyone who performed magic wasn’t a Catholic. One caller spelled out the word “context” to try and enlighten him. The point suggested at being that the nature of what the word “magic” means has changed over the course of the pat millennia. One priest, who knew Terry, appealed to him to see that he had made a misreading of a certain part of the Bible, that he had made a mistake which isn’t unusual for people to do. But through all this O’Connell remained unfazed in his beliefs.
Some of the callers did support his stand, but most of them sounded extreme, anti-modern and irrational. One man spoke about how the church’s power had suffered from including “gimmicks” like magic tricks in mass (although this wasn’t mentioned at all) and he even considered that music was unnecessary to the mass experience.
As the show progressed O’Connell included other practices that he considered “anti-Christian”. Those included yoga, reflexology and Harry Potter. His argument was that they taught doctrines which ran counter to the churches teaching and broke the “Thou shall not worship false gods” commandment. While I am no major Potter fan I cannot see how reading the books encourages an anti-Christian viewpoint or would make someone less Christian. To denounce therapeutic activities such as yoga and reflexology is irrational and unhelpful. These are pursuits which enrich and improve peoples lives and have no impact on their religious beliefs. The priest’s rants and blind adherence to the Bible became progressively more and more bizarre and despite the amount of people who tried to explain that what was happening in the school was innocent and inoffensive he wouldn’t relent. Perhaps he saw it as a test of his faith. Even when invited to the event he indignantly replied that he could not as a Christian watch the show and that it was an offence to God.
Finally towards the end of the show a senior member of the Church made a statement and announced the Church’s standing on the issue. Basically he said that he hoped that the event would be a success and that all the students involved would enjoy themselves, as this was the point of the whole event and also that he apologised for the “misunderstanding”. What exactly the “misunderstanding” was wasn’t clarified but this listener presumes it means “the ignorance of an over-zealous priest”. Of course a senior member of the Church cannot explicitly contradict the Bible. The show ended without Terry O’Connell withdrawing his opposition, and I didn’t expect him to.
In my humble opinion it’s because of people like Terry O’Connell that the Catholic Church is unpopular in Ireland. I think that people believe that backward priests who live in some kind of mental dark age are the norm, when in fact most priests (well, the ones I’ve met) are open-minded progressive men who are more than willing to listen to all peoples point of view. It’s only because crazy voices are always louder than sane and because the media will always focus on an interesting story that the impression of Catholicism does not reflect the reality. Most priests are very positive contributors to the community. Most priests will not shove doctrine down your throat or attack your beliefs. Most priests achieve their aim of making society a better place but sadly too much attention is given to the negative side of the Church. In a world that is becoming more materialistic and unfriendly I think religion has a lot to offer us, but our impressions of the Church is that it is oppressive and outdated. Which is sad because now there is a whole class of students who are going to take from this experience a skewed, mad vision of what religion means and offers.
Throughout the show I thought the man was of questionable sanity. His on-air candour was one of smug holier-than-thou preaching and self assured shock. His opposition at the offending show was in theory understandable, but only from an extremely fundamental perspective. It is written in the bible that followers should not be involved in any forms of sorcery or magic for the reason that the followers should have no other “other worldly” beliefs or views other than what the bible tells them. Absolute faith is needed I order for a religion to succeed. Sadly some people remain so tied to the letter of the religious laws that they are incapable of forming their own ideas or thoughts. To Terry O’Connell the matter was as simple as “the Bible says it’s wrong to perform magic, so it’s wrong and if you are involved in this then you have no right to call yourself a Christian”. He also made no allowances for what was considered “magic”. To him magic encompassed everything from casting spells and devil worship to making a rabbit appear out of a hat or changing the colour of a handkerchief. It raised the question of how appropriate or wise is it to live your life and make your decisions according to the rules written in the Bible. The idea that the teachings of the Bible were open for interpretation was unacceptable for O’Connell. These are, after all, the words of God.
Many people rang in trying to make sense of his argument, which wasn’t available for compromise. Callers included people who performed magic tricks (who O’Connell referred to as “sorcerers”) who expressed how harmless their hobbies were, the distressed parents of the children involved and ordinary people giving their opinions on the priests statements. The most interesting responses came from fellow priests who were trying to get through to the priest that the magic show was an inoffensive entertaining act that the children had worked hard at to amuse their peers at a fund-raising event and that nothing “bad” or misleading was involved. One priest spoke on how he himself performed a few magic tricks and that it had never crossed his mind that there would be anything disrespectful to God involved. Terry O’Connell’s response was that any priest who performed anything like that should question their priesthood and they should be ashamed of themselves.
One “sorcerer” who had been performing for years to audiences of all ages and walks of life and very often as part of charity work was angered that the priest should question his Catholic authenticity. Joe Duffy also pointed out that it was a serious and wide teaching allegation to say that anyone who performed magic wasn’t a Catholic. One caller spelled out the word “context” to try and enlighten him. The point suggested at being that the nature of what the word “magic” means has changed over the course of the pat millennia. One priest, who knew Terry, appealed to him to see that he had made a misreading of a certain part of the Bible, that he had made a mistake which isn’t unusual for people to do. But through all this O’Connell remained unfazed in his beliefs.
Some of the callers did support his stand, but most of them sounded extreme, anti-modern and irrational. One man spoke about how the church’s power had suffered from including “gimmicks” like magic tricks in mass (although this wasn’t mentioned at all) and he even considered that music was unnecessary to the mass experience.
As the show progressed O’Connell included other practices that he considered “anti-Christian”. Those included yoga, reflexology and Harry Potter. His argument was that they taught doctrines which ran counter to the churches teaching and broke the “Thou shall not worship false gods” commandment. While I am no major Potter fan I cannot see how reading the books encourages an anti-Christian viewpoint or would make someone less Christian. To denounce therapeutic activities such as yoga and reflexology is irrational and unhelpful. These are pursuits which enrich and improve peoples lives and have no impact on their religious beliefs. The priest’s rants and blind adherence to the Bible became progressively more and more bizarre and despite the amount of people who tried to explain that what was happening in the school was innocent and inoffensive he wouldn’t relent. Perhaps he saw it as a test of his faith. Even when invited to the event he indignantly replied that he could not as a Christian watch the show and that it was an offence to God.
Finally towards the end of the show a senior member of the Church made a statement and announced the Church’s standing on the issue. Basically he said that he hoped that the event would be a success and that all the students involved would enjoy themselves, as this was the point of the whole event and also that he apologised for the “misunderstanding”. What exactly the “misunderstanding” was wasn’t clarified but this listener presumes it means “the ignorance of an over-zealous priest”. Of course a senior member of the Church cannot explicitly contradict the Bible. The show ended without Terry O’Connell withdrawing his opposition, and I didn’t expect him to.
In my humble opinion it’s because of people like Terry O’Connell that the Catholic Church is unpopular in Ireland. I think that people believe that backward priests who live in some kind of mental dark age are the norm, when in fact most priests (well, the ones I’ve met) are open-minded progressive men who are more than willing to listen to all peoples point of view. It’s only because crazy voices are always louder than sane and because the media will always focus on an interesting story that the impression of Catholicism does not reflect the reality. Most priests are very positive contributors to the community. Most priests will not shove doctrine down your throat or attack your beliefs. Most priests achieve their aim of making society a better place but sadly too much attention is given to the negative side of the Church. In a world that is becoming more materialistic and unfriendly I think religion has a lot to offer us, but our impressions of the Church is that it is oppressive and outdated. Which is sad because now there is a whole class of students who are going to take from this experience a skewed, mad vision of what religion means and offers.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
NINE INCH NAILS: GHOSTS VOL 1-4
Yesterday Nine Inch Nails sole member Trent Reznor shocked fans by announcing the immediate online-only release of his new album “Ghosts Volumes 1-4” which no-one seemed to be in anyway aware of. Ghosts consists of 36 new instrumental tracks composed and recorded over an intense ten week period last autumn. In the words of Mr Reznor himself: "I've been considering and wanting to make this kind of record for years, but by its very nature it wouldn't have made sense until this point. This collection of music is the result of working from a very visual perspective - dressing imagined locations and scenarios with sound and texture; a soundtrack for daydreams. I'm very pleased with the result and the ability to present it directly to you without interference." By interference he is referring to the fact that the album can be purchased cheaply and downloaded straight from the bands website in various formats and pricing schemes how that he has no contract with anyone. What a hero.
Working with a team of regular NIN contributors including Atticus Ross, Alan Moulder and Alessandro Cortini, Trent has created an album of soundscapes and electronica songs which clearly focuses on improvisation and experimentation. While instrumental tracks have appeared on most NIN albums, lyrics and clear concepts have always been a central force at work behind Reznors work. Indeed certain lyrics have often been responsible for the alienation of many a NIN fan. But how does a Nine Inch Nails album rate without words? (Since I have thus far only been listening to the first two volumes, tracks 1 to 18, I can only review what I’ve heard and maybe I’ll write about the rest later.)
The opening track is one of the strongest on the album and reminds me of a depressed Philip Glass experimenting with synths- melancholic piano notes play and eerie synths rise up and a choir-ish sound in the background. The elements, while few, work together well and prepare the listener for an album which will be fairly minimal and progressive. The next track is similarly eerie and atmospheric with a spooky keys playing over a wall of distorted sound. Reznor returns to more familiar rocky territory as the album progresses, but electronic computer-driven elements remain central throughout. The angsty guitar riffs and eastern sounds are recognisably “nailsy” and remind me of songs from the Fragile era and production techniques used on more recent albums. Track four, with its gentle yet articulate organic guitars and drums sounds a bit like a Radiohead song. That is until a harsh guitar rips through the heart of the track. Some of the tracks which are particularly paired down to basic sounds and loops sound uninspiring and boring, although expecting an instrumental ambient album to be something more from what is essentially a rock band might be too much to hope for. The mixture of heavy and gentle songs can sometimes be disconcerting- just as you were enjoying a slower piece, a heavy track cuts in without warning. And I just can seem to get used to whatever harsh distortion is being used on the guitars. The piano pieces are what appeal to me most, especially the tracks nine, twelve and thirteen. Nine has a nice dubby feel to it with gentle beats, twelve recalls some of his sadder songs and breaks into an energetic pace. Thirteen is a relaxed mature piece with various different instruments weaving in and out.
Many of the louder songs contain elements of early industrial metal; bands like Ministry and Skinny Puppy are audible throughout. But the songs are far from being loaded with sound- in most cases they are minimal stripped down compositions. However most songs are too short to take full advantage of minimalism, the listener is too conscious of the different elements at work; the subtly just isn’t there. And sometimes the instruments don’t seem to be working together at all; whether this chaos is intentional isn’t clear. Another problem is that many of the songs are predictable- the song beings with the main riff, beat and loop and other instruments enter at regular intervals, and after 3 minutes the song is over without ever really deviating from the beginning.
As an album it is unconvincing. It doesn’t seem as though a lot of time was spent of the album (it was recorded over a ten week period) and many of the tracks feel underdeveloped. I’m not sure what Trent is trying to make. Is this his attempt at an electronic/ambient album? It comes off too much like IDM for beginners mixed with lessons learned from listening to copious amounts of Brian Eno. Ultimately I think what fails it is the inability of Trent to separate himself from a “rock songwriter” sensibility or perspective. Or maybe he’s made exactly what he set out to make- a sort of creepy electronic rock soundtrack. Whatever it is, I’m glad he’s not expecting normal people to pay for it.
You can download Ghosts at www.nin.com for money or maybe it's availible on a torrent site somewhere?
Go here for an alternative "Ghosts" review.
Monday, March 3, 2008
A Mix of Oil and Blood
Last night as I was stumbling around a crowded room at the Omniplex I was blessing my foresight of pre-booking tickets for There Will Be Blood. Being able to sell-out the largest screen in Galway isn’t a big deal for most disposable Hollywood blockbusters but I was surprised that so many people were as eager as I was to watch this almost three hour long story about a greedy businessman and the development of the US oil industry in the early part of last century. The recent Oscar hype must have had some effect. Directed by Paul Thomas Anderson (Magnolia, Punch Drunk Love) and starring an Oscar winning performance from Daniel Day Lewis, this mesmerising movie is about as perfect as a movie can be. All the elements one expects from a top class movie are here- beautiful cinematography, an immersive story-line, complex characters who are strange and wholly believable, chillingly good acting and a haunting score.
The film is anchored by Daniel Day-Lewis’s powerful performance as Daniel Plainview, an oilman whose dangerous competitive nature consumes everything around him. Day-Lewis' acting is a thing of beauty. Equal parts larger-than-life and nuanced, his Daniel Plainview perfectly embodies the spirit of a salesman while putting across the multiple layers required for the portrayal of a man with an all-too-human desire for power. Where another actor might have turned Plainview into a monster, Day-Lewis brings out a troubled and multi-dimensional character. His eyes stare through the other characters, focused on his future plans to drill and drink up the land.
Joining Day-Lewis is Paul Dano as Eli (and Paul) Sunday. Last seen in the charming Little Miss Sunday, where he gave a brilliantly angsty performance for which I thought he would be type-cast, Dano plays an intriguing young pastor who balances out Plainviews’ character appropriately. Sunday has a calm and silent demeanour, which is occasionally shattered by his violent and religious outbursts. His character remains an enigma and was one of my favourite elements to this movie. The fact that Dano was originally cast in the minor role of his brother Paul and only given the part of Eli less than a week before shooting began is a testament to his talent.
Providing an aural equivalent to the breathtaking shots and scenes of boiling intensity is Jonny Greenwoods’ haunting score, which permeates throughout the film. The barren desert landscape really comes to life when the background imagery and background sound come together.
There Will Be Blood has been compared to such landmark movies as Citizen Kane and deservedly so. This movie is a great achievement in cinema and wonderful in so many aspects. I firmly believe this will be remembered and regarded as an important work of art. While its might not be the easiest of films to watch at times, it is captivating and the performances really invite the viewer into the harsh world Anderson has created. As I staggered back out of the dark room and into the safety of reality I knew that what I had just witnessed was an immense movie experience that would stay with me for some time.
The film is anchored by Daniel Day-Lewis’s powerful performance as Daniel Plainview, an oilman whose dangerous competitive nature consumes everything around him. Day-Lewis' acting is a thing of beauty. Equal parts larger-than-life and nuanced, his Daniel Plainview perfectly embodies the spirit of a salesman while putting across the multiple layers required for the portrayal of a man with an all-too-human desire for power. Where another actor might have turned Plainview into a monster, Day-Lewis brings out a troubled and multi-dimensional character. His eyes stare through the other characters, focused on his future plans to drill and drink up the land.
Joining Day-Lewis is Paul Dano as Eli (and Paul) Sunday. Last seen in the charming Little Miss Sunday, where he gave a brilliantly angsty performance for which I thought he would be type-cast, Dano plays an intriguing young pastor who balances out Plainviews’ character appropriately. Sunday has a calm and silent demeanour, which is occasionally shattered by his violent and religious outbursts. His character remains an enigma and was one of my favourite elements to this movie. The fact that Dano was originally cast in the minor role of his brother Paul and only given the part of Eli less than a week before shooting began is a testament to his talent.
Providing an aural equivalent to the breathtaking shots and scenes of boiling intensity is Jonny Greenwoods’ haunting score, which permeates throughout the film. The barren desert landscape really comes to life when the background imagery and background sound come together.
There Will Be Blood has been compared to such landmark movies as Citizen Kane and deservedly so. This movie is a great achievement in cinema and wonderful in so many aspects. I firmly believe this will be remembered and regarded as an important work of art. While its might not be the easiest of films to watch at times, it is captivating and the performances really invite the viewer into the harsh world Anderson has created. As I staggered back out of the dark room and into the safety of reality I knew that what I had just witnessed was an immense movie experience that would stay with me for some time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)